An Appeal for Institutional Renewal, Meaningful Representation, and Greater Lay Participation in the Diocese of Dumaguete
THE question deserves serious consideration — should the Diocesan Council of the Laity be abolished, or should it be strengthened and revitalized to fulfill its rightful role in the life and mission of the local Church?
Following the 2015–2017 Diocesan Pastoral Assembly, the Commission on the Laity was organized. With the emergence of this Commission, the Diocesan Council of the Laity appears to have gradually lost its institutional visibility and relevance. In previous years, the Council was regularly convened by the Vicar General, the appointed Spiritual Director, with discussions leading to concrete and achievable pastoral initiatives. Today, it has remained largely inactive.This raises an important question: Has the Commission on the Laity made the Council unnecessary, or have we simply failed to maximize the potential of an existing diocesan institution?
I believe the Council deserves another opportunity. Its constitutional foundation, historical significance, and potential contribution to the Church’s mission warrant serious consideration before any decision to abolish it.
I. THE ECCLESIAL AND HISTORICAL BASIS
The Second Vatican Council, particularly through Lumen Gentium, promulgated by Pope Paul VI on November 21, 1964, reaffirmed the Church as the People of God and emphasized the universal call to holiness.
It also clarified that the laity are not merely recipients of pastoral services. By virtue of Baptism, they share in Christ’s mission as priest, prophet, and king, with a distinct responsibility to bring the Gospel into their families, workplaces, communities, and wider society. This vision calls for an active, responsible, and organized laity.
In 1967, Pope Paul VI established the Pontifical Council for the Laity through the Motu Proprio Catholicam Christi Ecclesiam, further recognizing the importance of lay participation in the Church.
In the Philippines, the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines (CBCP), through its Episcopal Commission on the Laity (ECLA), promotes and supports the apostolate of the lay faithful. The Council of the Laity of the Philippines (CLP) likewise provides a national platform for lay collaboration and participation.
At the diocesan level, Councils of the Laity serve an important function — bringing together diverse organizations, associations, movements, and communities into a unified and coordinated body.
The message is clear: an empowered laity is essential to a vibrant and missionary Church.
II. THE CONSTITUTIONAL AND SYNODAL FOUNDATION IN THE DIOCESE OF DUMAGUETE
The Diocesan Council of the Laity is not a newly conceived organization. It is an established diocesan institution and one of the outcomes of the First Diocesan Synod of Dumaguete, held on November 3–7, 1992.
Its Constitution and By-Laws, found on pages 50–60 of the official synodal document, First Diocesan Synod of Dumaguete: Along the Path of the Second Plenary Council of the Philippines, Part II – Casting Our Net Into the Future, provide the framework for its organization and governance.
Article IV, Section 1 identifies its principal officers:
1. President
2. Vice-President
3. Secretary
4. Treasurer
5. Auditor
6. Press Relations Officer
Article IV, Section 2 provides for a Spiritual Director, who may be the Bishop or a priest designated by him.
Article III places the Council under the direct supervision of the Bishop, a relationship also reflected in the organizational structure on page 80 of the synodal document.
These provisions establish an institutional basis for considering the Council’s reactivation and reorganization, subject to the Bishop’s authority and approval.
An institution does not automatically lose its legitimacy because it has become inactive. Its inactivity should instead prompt an examination of what went wrong and how it can once again fulfill its intended purpose.
III. TWO OPTIONS: ABOLISH OR STRENGTHEN?
The Diocese has two possible courses of action:
Option 1: Abolish the Council of the Laity.
Its organizational, coordinating, and social concerns functions would be absorbed by the Commission on the Laity, consolidating these responsibilities under one diocesan structure.
Option 2: Retain and Strengthen the Council of the Laity.
The Council would be reactivated through organizational restructuring, broader membership, and meaningful representation, taking into account DORMC and the various recognized diocesan-wide and parish-based organizations and associations. The second option deserves serious consideration.
The issue is not simply whether another diocesan structure is necessary. It is whether an existing institution, established through the Diocesan Synod, can be made functional and relevant again.
The objective should not be to create another layer of bureaucracy but to provide the lay faithful with meaningful representation, shared responsibility, and concrete opportunities to participate in the Church’s mission.
IV. A PROPOSED FRAMEWORK FOR REACTIVATIONSubject to the Bishop’s approval and the applicable constitutional provisions, I respectfully propose the following organizational and operational measures:
1. Organize the Lay Organizations into Five Categories
For orderly representation and coordination, recognized lay organizations, associations, ministries, movements, and communities may be grouped into five categories:
A. Parish Pastoral Councils (PPCs)
The Parish Pastoral Councils of all parishes throughout the Diocese, represented by their respective presidents, consistent with Article II, Section 1 of the Council’s Constitution and By-Laws.
B. Mandated Organizations
– Knights of Columbus
– Catholic Women’s League
– Secular Franciscan Order
– Confraternity of Christian Doctrine
– Family Life Apostolate
– Basic Ecclesial Communities (BECs)
– Other recognized mandated lay organizations
C. Marian Organizations
– World Apostolate of Fatima (WAF)
– Third Order of Carmel (TOC)
– Legion of Mary
– Little Children of Mary
– Daughters of Mary Immaculate
– Confraternity of Our Lady of Lourdes
– Barangay Sang Birhen/SAMARIA
– Other recognized Marian organizations
D. Devotional Organizations
– Crusaders of the Holy Face of Jesus
– San Pedro Calungsod Devotion
– Sacred Heart Devotion
– Divine Mercy Apostolate
– Sto. Niño Associations
– St. Joseph Associations
– St. Anthony Associations
– Adoracion Nocturna
– Other recognized devotional organizations
E. Renewal Movements and Communities
The Diocesan Organization of Renewal Movements and Communities (DORMC), representing recognized renewal movements and ecclesial communities in the Diocese.
This classification seeks to ensure that the different expressions of lay spirituality, apostolate, and service are represented in an orderly and inclusive manner.
2. Establish an Initial Five-Member Council
Each of the five categories shall designate one representative to constitute the initial core membership of the reorganized Council, subject to its Constitution and By-Laws and the Bishop’s approval.
3. Elect or Designate the Principal Officers
The five representatives shall elect or be designated to serve as the Council’s principal officers:
– President
– Vice-President
– Secretary
– Treasurer
– Auditor
The Press Relations Officer provided for in the existing Constitution and By-Laws shall likewise be addressed in the reorganization, in accordance with the approved process.
4. Establish Regular Meetings and an Annual Assembly
The Council officers, together with the appointed Spiritual Director, shall meet quarterly, with special meetings whenever necessary.
Its initial task should be the preparation of a comprehensive Program Plan of Action (PPOA), identifying objectives, activities, timelines, responsibilities, and expected outcomes.
An Annual Assembly of representatives and members of the five categories should also be institutionalized. It shall provide an opportunity to:
– Present the Council’s annual accomplishment report.
– Discuss and approve its proposed program for the succeeding year.
– Share the accomplishments, challenges, and initiatives of the different organizations.
– Identify opportunities for collaboration, formation, and greater participation in the diocesan mission.
The assembly may culminate in an Advent Recollection, Thanksgiving Mass, and Christmas Fellowship to promote spiritual renewal and unity among the lay faithful.
5. Develop a Collective Voice on Social Concerns
The Council must go beyond organizational meetings, recollections, and fellowship. It should also contribute meaningfully to the social mission of the Church.
Under the guidance and authority of the Bishop, it may formulate and communicate collective positions, recommendations, and pastoral responses to relevant social, economic, political, environmental, and other pressing concerns affecting the community and the country.
The lay faithful are called to witness to the Gospel beyond church premises. Their participation must extend to defending truth, justice, human dignity, the common good, environmental stewardship, and the protection of the vulnerable.
A Council that does not engage with the pressing concerns of society risks limiting its purpose to maintaining its own activities rather than contributing to Christian transformation.
V. BEYOND ORGANIZATION: A CALL TO SYNODALITY AND MISSION
Ultimately, this proposal is not about preserving an organization for its name, officers, or institutional existence. It is about making the laity more organized, empowered, responsible, and responsive to the mission of the Church.
The Commission on the Laity and the Council of the Laity need not be competing institutions. Their functions can be complementary.
The Commission can provide pastoral direction, guidance, and coordination, while the Council can serve as a platform for representation, consultation, collaboration, and collective action among the different lay organizations and communities.
This is consistent with the spirit of synodality: walking together, listening to one another, discerning God’s will, and working together in fulfilling the mission entrusted to the Church.
The more important question, therefore, is not whether the Diocese needs another council. It is whether we are serious about empowering the lay faithful and recognizing their rightful responsibility in the life and mission of the local Church.
As a long-time lay leader who has served in various Church-based organizations, I offer these thoughts not as a criticism of existing diocesan structures but as an appeal for institutional reflection, pastoral renewal, and constructive action.
We should not allow an institution established through synodal processes, with a clear constitutional foundation and a mission to unite the laity, to remain dormant without first examining its potential for renewal.
Let us not abolish what we can reform. Let us not weaken what we are called to strengthen. And let us not overlook the contribution of the laity when the Church needs their participation, collective wisdom, and courageous witness.
The question before the Diocese is clear: Abolish the Council of the Laity, or strengthen it and make it relevant once again?
My position is to pursue the question of its reactivation and strengthening — restore its purpose, broaden its representation, empower its members, and provide the lay faithful with a meaningful platform to walk together in faith, service, and mission.
After all, the Church is not the clergy alone. We are all the People of God, called not merely to belong to the Church but to actively participate in building up the Body of Christ.
