Family: Communion and Community of Persons

CHAPTER XII:
 
THE FAMILY AS A COMMUNION AND COMMUNITY OF PERSONS
 
The family, which is founded and given life by love, is a community of persons: of
husband and wife, of parents and children, of relatives. Its first task is to live with fidelity the
reality of communion in a constant effort to develop an authentic community of persons. The
inner principle of that task, its permanent power and goal is love: without love the family is
not a community of persons and, in the same way, without love the family cannot live, grow
and perfect itself as a community of persons.
 
As stated in Chapter IX, the family is an interpersonal reality – a communion and
community of persons. The notion of person has been discussed. There is need to understand
what is a communion and community of persons.

What is communion and community of persons?

The existential mode of personal existence is co-existence. Man does not live alone. From
the moment of his conception up to the moment of his death, unless he is stranded alone in an
island, human beings surround him with whom he lives and interacts. He participates in the
life of the persons around him by sharing their joys, sorrows, travails and goals. The person
could participate in a common endeavor in a one-to-one relationship or one-to-many. The
first is communion, the inter-personal dimension of the family, while the second is
communitarian relationship, the social dimension. Wojtyla calls communion as the realm of
the I-thou·  and community the realm of the we. However, any communitarian relationship
must be built on communion. There could be no true communitarian relationship without true
communion between persons.

1. Communion: the realm of the I-thou (the interpersonal dimension)

The I-thou  is a relationship of a subject to an object to which the subject, the I, addresses

a thou,  the object. However, the object addressed is not something but someone. The subject
is addressing another subject who is distinct from the subject and yet akin to the subject. The
object is akin to the subject because the thou is a specific person to whom the subject relates
to as another I, another self that the I addresses as a thou. The I sees the thou as another I.
The I and the thou are distinct. The distinction is based on the separate existence of
the thou  from the I. The thou  is another subject that also enjoys self-possession, self-
governance and self-dominion. The subject could only address the other as a thou if he
recognizes and respects the other as another subject, another I. Thus, inter-personal
relationships could only be established between beings that are subjects who recognize each
other as subjects. Addressing the other as a thou, respecting the other as another subject, is an
affirmation of the I’s personal subjectivity because the I sees the self in the thou, i.e.,
the I recognizes in the other those qualities that make him a person, someone, and not a mere
object, something.

If the dealing between the beings in a relationship were that of a person to a thing,
Buber would call this an I-it relationship. Relating to another person always as an it is
demeaning for the other person because his personality is reduced to that of a thing. A
relationship characterized by use instead of respect for the other. There is no equality
involved. Neither there is mutual respect for each other. Persons who behave this way show
an attitude demeaning as well for his personhood because a thing cannot affirm his own
personhood. Thus, treating the other as a thing could also reduce the person to a thing. What
is proper of persons is not to be used as objects; rather, persons are beings whose proper
behavior towards another human being should be that of love. As Kant declares, we must
relate to persons as ends and not merely as means. This presupposes that at times we make
use of other human beings for personal benefit. In the family, younger children relate to their
parents as means to obtain those goods that they need.

Without the mutual affirmation and recognition of the other as another I, there could
not be an I-thou relationship. The relationship then is reduced to an I-it, a relationship
between a person and a thing. The mutual recognition and affirmation of each other as
subjects constitute the interpersonal dimension of the communion among persons. The family
as a communion of persons is built on the mutual recognition and affirmation of each other’s
personhood. Unity pervades in the relationship. This is seen in the union of mind and heart in
the pursuit of a good. The communion between persons is found in the relationship between
married and engaged couples, mother and child as well as that of a father and a child in the
family. Within the family setting, such has particular demands on the relationship between
husband and wife, children and parents. Since they are both subjects, bath are autonomous
entities that are self-governing because they exhibit self-knowledge, self-possession, are
capable of freely giving themselves and enter into communion with other persons.

Communion between persons is created on the mutual affirmation of each other as

subjects who are distinct from each other and yet are both subjects who are self-determining
to a god.  Likewise, it requires recognition that the other enjoys self-possession and self-
governance. For husband and wife, communion is also expressed in the unity of body and
soul.

The mutual recognition and affirmation of the subjects in a communion of persons is the
basis of a community of persons. In the family, the simple communion between spouses is
transformed into a community with the birth of the children. The communion widens into a
community of interpersonal relationships, the realm of the we-relation.

2. Community: the realm of the we

The we  is many Is or many selves who exist and act together towards a single aim or
common good. The common good unites the members of the community. It is not the sum
total of personal goods; rather it is the good proper of all the members of that community. It
is what unites individual persons and ensures the true good of each one.[2] In attaining the
common good, the persons do not lose their subjectivity; rather, it is reaffirmed and re-
strengthened belt in a new mode, in the realm of the we. The members of this community,
which has the communion of persons as the base and unifying force are beings who treat each
other as another I in an I-thou relationships. Thus, in a community the different Is that make
up the community do not lose their personality. Only beings capable of determining
themselves to a good that they have apprehended could truly form part of a community
because they understand that the good sought is good for him and a good for the others as
well. Failure to attain the good sought would likewise mean frustration on his part. Hence,
active involvement in its attainment is a way of affirming the personal attributes of the
subjects namely, self-possession, self-governance, and self-dominion.
 True community building hinges on the recognition that the others are needed for the
attainment of the goal. Every member of the community as distinct subjects has a personal
contribution to make in this community. Each member's contribution varies; thus, assuring
the diversity in functions but unity in the goals. Within the family setting, each family
member has different functions and roles within the family and the fulfillment of their roles is
what assures family life. No one contribution is insignificant. Each one is important.

Thus, in any family setting, the roles of father, mother and children contribute to making
the family be what it really is. The mere union of husband and wife without children cannot
be called a family. The communion of persons necessarily extends to a community for it to
become a family. In the case of the family, the single aim is the building up of a community
of life and love built on the communion of persons.

In the family setting, the common good of the family is assured if the common good of
the spouses are attained and preserved. Among the common goods of the spouses are the love
between them, fidelity to each other, honor, permanence of their communion until death,
children born of the unitive and procreative love between them, and the gift of being a
community where everything is mine, yours and ours. Love between the spouses is the base
for the begetting and education of children that are fruits of that love. Fidelity to each other
guarantees the emotional and psychological needs of the spouses and children because they
know that they are loved. To honor one another preserves the good name of the husband and
reputation of the wife. Preserving honor ensures permanence of their communion until death.
Safeguarding the attainment of this common good assures personal happiness or self-
fulfillment of each member of the family. These are the conditions for the full and tranquil
development of each family member and thus constitute the common good of the family.

3. The fulfillment of the person

A person acts and enters into a relationship because he is seeking self-fulfillment. Wojtyla
defines fulfillment as "tendency away from what is incomplete toward an appropriate
fullness."It has an ontic dimension, the actualization of a potentiality, and a moral dimension,
the orientation of the act to its proper end, i.e., conformity of an action to a norm. In addition,
a phenomenological dimension comes into play because the person realizes that he is
fulfilled, that he is happy. Self-fulfillment can be achieved in a two-fold manner, through the
harmonious relationship of man with himself, in his subjectivity, and through a true
relationship with another, in his inter-subjectivity. Movement from potentiality to actuality
implies imperfection on the part of the subject that acts; thus the need to act to attain the
perfection proper to him be it within him or in cooperation with others. At the same time for
such action to be self-fulfilling, the action itself must be something proper to his being a
subject. Thus, the action must reflect his subjectivity.

4. Self-fulfillment in the subjective realm

Self-fulfillment in the subjective realm demands that his personhood or subjectivity be

revealed. For the action to be self-fulfilling, the action must be marked by freedom. It is in
and through the personal free actions that the ontic, moral, and phenomenological dimensions
are attained. In the ontic dimension, the action must show that their respective proper objects,
the truth and the good actualize the faculties of the intellect and the will. In the
phenomenological dimension, the action must manifest that the person auto-directed himself
to a good that he considers worth pursuing. In that act of self-determination, he shows that he
is the author and governor of his own acts. Even if there is an external stimulus, the
compelling force comes from within man. There must be the apprehension of that which he
would like to pursue and understand it as something good for him. At the same time he must
will the good and the means to attain that good. The happiness of the subject is internal
though it could have external manifestations.

Happiness is in the person's awareness of his ability to perform an action in which the
beginning and end is himself.

However, it is not enough that an action be fulfilled. The object of the act must facilitate
reaching his true end as a person. Thus, his self-determining capacity must be directed to a
true good proper for him and his actions. It is not enough that it is simply a good that satisfies
his longings in which the features of his personhood are realized. The good itself sought and
the means used to attain that good must also be good. The basis for the goodness of the object
or good desired is the objective goodness based on the ontological foundation that something
is good because it is. For the action performed to attain the end, the required condition is the
action's conformity with the laws governing all things to reach the end proper for this being.
Those laws which man discovers are inscribed in his being, in his personhood.

In the subjective realm, conscience plays an important role. Conscience approves or

reproves the action done. If the person receives an approval peace and happiness follows. If
the conscience reproaches, a feeling of guilt and restlessness pervades. The conscience is the
mirror, which reflects whether the good towards which one tends is transcendentally true.
Transcendental truth is based on ontological truth. Something is true because it is. [n the
moral order, an act is true if the act conforms to the laws governing the act. truth is not solely
based on the truth discovered and/or attached to the act by the subject. The judgment of
conscience discloses the experience of what is morally good or bad. Any act done which is
morally good will be self-fulfilling; otherwise, it leads to frustration.

In any action performed there is an objective and subjective perfection achieved. The
objective perfection refers to the fulfillment of the act itself while the subjective perfection to
the perfection achieved by the author of an act. The subjective perfection in the action has a
greater importance because actions have transforming capacity. Actions could make a person
better or worse. An example is the fulfillment of the couples in the marital act. The mere
performance of the act, the objective perfection, mayor may not result in the subjective
perfection of the couples. The act will be truly self-fulfilling if the act is carried out following
the moral norms that govern such act: the act is carried out in a human way and open to
procreation. Self-fulfillment here does not only mean the pleasures attained in the act. Rather,
self-fulfillment lies in the transforming effect of the act that makes the couples better or
worse persons while performing the act. In the subjective on tic dimension, the ontic
perfection is achieved as the personal features are actualized in the whole act. However, over
and above the ontic perfection is the moral perfection of the agents who perform the sexual
act observing the proper end of the act itself.

5. Self-fulfillment in the inter-subjective realm

In the inter-subjective dimension of the person, self-fulfillment also takes place. Man is a
participative, being; hence, self-fulfillment could be derived from relationships with others in
achieving common goals, sharing concerns and/or joys and travails of a jointly lived life. In
his search for happiness, man reaches out of himself. This reaching out is indicative of his
social dimension and of the ontological demand of being fulfilled in his transcending towards
another person.

The demand of the personalist attitude of affirming and confirming the personhood of
another assures the fulfillment of the person in inter-personal relationships. By treating the
other as a subject and respecting the legitimate freedom of the other actualizes the
potentialities of the protagonists in the relationship. Dealing with the other person in love and
for love transforms the subjects into better persons. Thus, the ontological and moral demands
of self-fulfillment are achieved. For a person to be happy in these relationships, the persons
involved in the relationship must mutually treat one another as another I. Each person is
called to experience the other person as a subject and participate in the humanity of the other.
This entails helping the other be a person by treating him as a person deserves. This also
demands that they help one another to be a person by fostering and respecting those attributes
that make a person.

Fulfillment is achieved in the I-thou relationship through the mutual acceptance and

confirmation of the other as another I. Self-fulfillment is achieved in the affirmation of the
person that I am when the other affirms me as a person, another I, because he I is affirmed as
somebody, a self-governing being, and not just something, a self-governing being. In the act
of affirming the personhood of the other, the I affirms that he/she is capable of affirming the
personhood of another. In a way, it is affirming one's self through the affirmation of the other.
Put in another way, affirming the other as a person is an indirect way of affirming one's
subjectivity. The other person's affirmation of another's subjectivity underscores the
discovery of subjectivity not as an individualistic stance but as recognition that there is a
subject outside and independent of one's self. Thus, one's subjectivity is affirmed and
confirmed. The person is not reduced into a world of his own but part of something bigger
than the self, the relation between the I and the thou. Another subject also confirms his
existence; hence, he is not a being who auto creates himself.

On the other hand, self-fulfillment in a we-relationship is attained through an active

participation in achieving the common good of the community. The common good has
objective and subjective dimensions. The objective dimension is the goal that everyone
attains while the subjective dimension is the perfection that the person attains in the pursuit of
the common goal of the community. Self-fulfillment in the we -relation refers to the
subjective dimension. When the person works to attain the common good of the community,
the person intentionally sets to acquire a certain value, which the other persons in the
community also longs. The intentional acquiring of the value puts into play the personal
structures and actualizes them. At the same time, when he actively participates in acquiring
the common good of the community, he is also acquiring a personal good because the
personal good is virtually contained in it. This is another mode by which subjectivity is
reaffirmed, through participating in achieving a good in which the person is counted on and
whose contribution to the attainment of the common good is counted on and needed by other
members of the community.

Being a part of an inter-personal relationship or a community is fulfilling, not only in the

ontological dimension but also in the moral dimension. The awareness of the need for self-
perfection creates obliges, as it moves one to establish an interpersonal relationship and to
form part of the community_ Thus one moves towards attaining authentic happiness,
observing at the same time, the personalist demands in a given relationship inter-personal
relationship and being a part of the community contributes to the person's attaining his
authentic happiness. These personalistic demands of an inter-personal relationship require
that persons treat each other as ends and not solely mean to attain personal happiness. In
short, the attitude that persons involved in inter-personal relationships must adopt is that of
love.

Review questions:
1. Is an unrequited love an I-it or an I-thou? Justify your answer
 
2. Compare and contrast the I-thou and the we-relation.
 
3.  Could persons who are bound by belonging to the same race, , same culture and
having the same aspirations but do not reside in the same place claim that they belong
to the same community ? Why or why not?