The second definition of ‘Threshold’ was as follows: –
‘Minimum or maximum value (established for an attribute, characteristic, or parameter) which serves as a benchmark for comparison or guidance and any breach of which may call for a complete review of the situation or the redesign of a system.’
If what has appeared to me to be a seemingly sudden change in the threshold, conveys to others any suggestion of truth or indication of a real situation, it is likely that its widening has not been a rapid and unplanned mutation, or merely, and more likely, a temporary but noteworthy shift in my imagination, but a more gradual, real and therefore significant form of evolution in response to prevailing conditions.
In becoming a region rather than merely a dividing line, it has itself taken on qualities of breadth and depth which could be said to equate to the ‘minimum or maximum value ... which serves as a benchmark’ – the minimum being at the point of departure from the laity’s sheepfold, and the maximum being at ordination. In the space between these two is a journey we are all called to make: a journey towards becoming the persons God wills us to be.
This definition continues: – ‘any breach may call for a complete review of the situation or the redesign of a system.’
Consciously stepping out from the fold at the initial stage of becoming a candidate for the diaconate corresponds to breaching the ‘minimum value’, and ordination can be taken as the corresponding breach of the ‘maximum value’.
In a sense, both of these breaches ‘call for a review of the situation’, but what makes the intervening territory so spacious is its need to accommodate, not only candidates for the diaconate and the priesthood, but as many lay men and women as can be brought to a recognition of their call to journey further into their faith, and as can be accompanied and supported by those already comfortable and confident in their position at some point ahead of them. The territory is thus populated from among the laity without individuals ever being seen to desert their previously occupied places among the pews and parishioners; and with priests and deacons being prepared to view the increasing potential of this central population as the fertile ground which it should be, and moving any predetermined boundaries back to incorporate advancing Church members into their regular field of view, they too become part of that same middle ground which is at one and the same time the fertile field, the personal desert, the start point and continuation of the individual’s journey toward a deeper relationship with God.
What had once been seen as nothing more than a line of separation can become a common ground on which fellowship, unity and ecumenism can flourish.
This is the ground on which ‘The New Evangelization’ can become a living reality in every parish, with priests, deacons and laity working together to discern and bring to fruition the various latent gifts within the community. It is here that the reality of Church can be rediscovered and, where necessary, redefined.
‘The redesign of a system’, if or when shown to be necessary, must wait for the discernment of others, though not without input from ourselves. The fruitful middle field where the Holy Spirit both creates the space for us to meet and merge once more in Christ’s name, and guides us into a new level of mutual reliance, love and respect, must be neither forgotten nor taken for granted; nor must it be dismissed as being of no consequence. Without it such gatherings as next October’s Synod in Rome will fail to realize their potential.
We are all ‘The Church’, and almost invisible behind the clearly proclaimed and plainly visible product of men having followed their vocations through to ordination, each one of us has some part to play in the on-going story and welfare of the whole. Christ’s all-inclusive and worldwide peace can develop and thrive throughout mankind only when all callings are discerned, accepted and acted upon within our own local communities.
Just as those who are truly called to be ordained must be ordained, so too those who are not must not. I believe there are many of us who are, paradoxically, being called not to be ordained: to remain very much anchored among the laity; not necessarily to function in the same way as deacons, though – other than as a minister of the altar – that will no doubt become the calling of some, but to play whatever part is theirs in building the faith of those around them.
Once again I hear echoes of truth in Aristotle’s words:
'Where your talents and the needs of the world cross, there lies your vocation.'
