P.J.

Anderson
Nov. 13, 2013
Fr. Oberle
Western Theological Tradition







Apostolicam Actuositatem


A crucial component of the universal Church, the laity is composed of those possessing
social responsibility outside the functions of the church but are not excluded from its mission. In
fact, the Church could not accomplish its task by itself, and thus clergy and laymen alike are
called to partake in the incorporation of all peoples into an understanding and relationship with
almighty God. In accomplishing this task, it has been necessary for the Church to define the roles
of its constituents so as to effectively partition those responsibilities appropriate to its members.
These definitions were most necessary to accommodate a new era and the evolving activities of
the laity, helping to make more relevant a christian attitude in the contemporary world. By and
large, the formal interpretation of the laity and its apostolate at the Second Vatican Council, or
Vatican II, was a grand success, despite any need for minor alterations. Having effectively
defined the lay apostolate, the council had enable a revolutionary unison of clergy and laity,
creating an efficient machine geared for the shepherding of humanity towards Almighty God.
In accomplishing a common goal, a body of individuals must partition tasks
complimentary to the capabilities of its members. Thus it was imperative that the Universal
Church recognize the role of its laymen; Among the various duties in the councils agenda,
special attention was given to identifying the scope of responsibility for the laity in a document


titled Apostolicam actuositatem. The Church, for the sake of intensify[ing] the apostolic activity
of Gods people (Flannery, 403), felt it necessary to address the breadth and limitations of the
laitys activities in advancing its mission. These activities of the mystical body (405), or
apostolate, are defined in such a manner so as to compliment the clergys own activities and
accommodate, in the twentieth century, the paradigm shifts in the social sphere. The laity, to
avoid being unhelpful both to the church and to themselves[works in accordance with] the
precept of charity, which is the Lords greatest commandment (405-6). This guideline ensures a
free-standing devotion, on the part of the laity, in helping his fellow man, and is the foundation
on which the lay apostolate is to be undertaken. Subsequently, the document lays out the
objectives of the lay apostolate with the premise that the layperson rely on his
onlyconscience, [his] christian conscience (410). Guided by his resolute conscience, the
layperson strives to defend his christian principles and exemplify charitable works, restoring and
augmenting the secular world to a state of greater excellence. In an attempt to make more
tangible the individual roles of the vast laity, the document further divides the parts of the laity
based on specific functions:
their communities to attract people towards the church;[families,] the foundation of
human society[to] pass on the faith to their childreneducate them in it[and]
present itself has a domestic sanctuary of the church;Young people[who] should
become the first apostles to the young;[and the international] laity[who] in their
fidelitypromote the true common good (416-22).
This outline enables the layman to identify his particular task and where it falls in the grand
scheme of the churchs universal mission; whether individually or within a group, the laity is
encouraged to exercise his apostolate to the best of his ability with the churchs mission always


in mind. It is important, also, that the laity acknowledge the ecclesiastic hierarchy, and how they
are to cooperate with the clergy in bringing about humanitys unity with God, but as the
document makes clear, those outside the christian sect deserve special attention by the laity, as
these nonetheless possess human values held by all humankind (435). Finally, the document
calls for a formal training of the laity in optimizing the efficacy of ones apostolate. This training
ought to begin in the formative years of the layman and conclude with specific and individual
training, by reason of the diversity of persons and circumstances (436). Having thoroughly
defined the christian laity and its responsibility within the churchs mission, the document thusly
draws a route whereby the laity may most efficiently and effectively practice their apostolate.
This in conjunction with the activities of the clergy affords both groups a greater ability in
achieving the Churchs goal than either would otherwise have alone.
The clear interpretation of the lay apostolate came at a most necessary time in the course
of the Catholic churchs history. Having entered the postmodern era, the world was in need of a
new understanding of the Church and accommodating the apostolate to a postmodern population.
Greater occupational opportunities outside the priesthood were on the rise, and thus the
diminishing proportion of priests and religious vocations prompted a comprehensive reflection
on the states of life (Alberigo, 81). It was evident, then, that the laity would need to take on a
greater role in the Catholic church, and that the council stipulate what this role was. Decades
prior to the calling of the council, however, attempts to institute secular establishments had been
successful, expanding discourse between different branches of the laity and ultimately making
the laity an agent and partner in dialogue at the heart of the Church. This seemingly natural
response on the part of the laity in compensating for the lack of clergy led to Pius XIIs desire to
promote these activities, and the subsequent discussion of the lay apostolate at Vatican II. The


unprecedented degree of dialogue between the laity and the hierarchy of the church, as explained
by John Ford in The Impact of Vatican II, was largely a product of discontent due to the lack of
laymen representation. As was already evident, a good number of laity was capable of efficiently
going about its apostolate, yet there was little discussionbetween the clergy and the
laity[but following Vatican II, the laity could] speak frankly about certain matters in the
Church (Ford, 70-1). The right to voice opinions and offer proposals on behalf of the Church
further defined the role of the laity, effectively expanding its responsibility beyond active
ministry. Arguably, the role of the laity in the mission of the Catholic Church had never been
emphasized to a greater degree than it had at Vatican II. With fewer persons pursing the
priesthood and the growing population of willing laity having inadequate representation in
conciliar affairs, the Church responded thoroughly and with a collective mind open to reform.
Clergy and laity alike were now primed for the revolutionary years ahead.
Whether or not the council was truly successful in its endeavor to clarify the lay
apostolate remains to be discussed. The fact that, as of the year 2013, no formal change has been
made to the role of the lay apostolate affirms the documents relevance in terms of the 21st
century. As robust as the document is even to this day, mention should be made to the subtle
modifications on the part of the papacy, perhaps, for the purpose of clarification. In his August
23, 2012 letter to the International Forum of Catholic Action, Pope Benedict XVI hones in on the
laitys responsibility in the Catholic Church, calling for a novel attitude of being co-
responsible [, rather than collaborative,] for the Churchs being and acting (Benedict XVI).
While this may be regarded as more of a semantics issue, Pope Benedict XVI does instill a sense
of added authority of the laity and a greater unity with the clergy. This can be seen in faint
contrast with Apostolicam Actuositatem, which seems to suggest a supervised participation of


the laity, cooperating in their own particular way with the hierarchy[yet] under the higher
direction of the hierarchy (Flannery, 429). In further maximizing the potential of the lay
apostolate, Pope Benedict XVI sees a need for interdependence between the laity and the clergy,
advocating a reduction in the pyramidal hierarchy of yore and an equalization of the two entities
statures with respect to the Churchs mission. Evidently, revision of the role of the laity, albeit
minuscule, is necessary with the progressing era. With this in mind, we may conclude that there
exist no simple answers concerning the ultimate success or failure of Vatican II as far as the
layman is concernedyet satisfaction may be expressed that much was done (Ford, 73-4).
Indeed was so much done that little potential may exist for redefining the lay apostolate. Suffice
it to say, the long-standing influence of Apostolicam Actuositatem and the Churchs pursuit for
continual excellence ought to make Vatican IIs attempts in defining the laity an ultimate
success.
Via Apostolicam Actuositatem, Vatican II successfully gave a thorough interpretation of
the role of the laity in the scheme of the Universal Church. Doing so made possible a newfound
relationship between the laity and clergy