The Family Manifesto: Families of the World Unite!

The Compendium issues forth a cri-de-coeur, a cry from the heart, that there be a "family politics," one that is transformative of civil society, including its economic, social, juridical, and cultural aspects, so that civil society serves the family's needs.  Civil society must recognize the "social priority" of the family. 

CORPUS CHRISTI, TX (Catholic Online) - The Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church has a sort of social manifesto for the family within it.  A manifesto is a public declaration that contains the primary principles or intentions of some group.  Our Declaration of Independence may be said to be our country's manifesto. 

The family manifesto found in the Compendium revolves around the notions of the "social subjectivity" and the "social priority" of the family.  It also states that the family as a natural institution has certain "family rights."  It enjoins upon societies too often structured around false notions of individualism to re-think their basic premises, and to modify their economic, political, legal, and cultural institutions to accommodate the family better so that it may flourish, and not merely subsist.

The concept of "social subjectivity" steers us in between two social errors: radical individualism or atomism, on the one hand, and socialism or collectivism, on the other.  In the former error, only the individual matters; the group does not matter.  This sort of thinking is found in most modern, liberal Western democracies. In the latter error, only the group matters; the individual does not matter. 

This sort of thinking is found in Islamist or communist countries.  The notion of "social subjectivism" intends to place responsibilities on individuals and recognize their intrinsic dignity, but at the same time stress that whatever we do affects others.  We necessarily exercise our subjectivity within society, hence the notion of "social subjectivity."

The notion of "social subjectivity" is a notion that includes not only individuals, but also families.  Hence families are not separate cells unlinked with other families.  There are, in fact "demonstrations of solidarity and sharing among families themselves," which ought to extend out into "various forms of participation in social and political life." (Compendium, No. 246) 

The notion "social subjectivity" understands that "people must not be considered only as individuals, but also in relation to the family nucleus to which they belong, the specific values and needs of which must be taken into due account." (Compendium, No. 254)

The concept of the "social priority" of the family is one where civil society recognizes the "priority and 'antecedence' of the family."  In other words, as a natural society, the family comes first; the family precedes the State.  The family ought to be a focus of all civil society, and civil society "should never fail in its fundamental task of respecting and fostering the family." (Compendium, No. 252) 

Therefore, economic, social, political, legal, juridical, and cultural realms will focus on the family and recognize the priority of the family.  This will call for a shifting of values in societies which have--for generations--structured their institutions with an eye toward individualism.

The notion of the "social priority" of the family means that the family ought to be understood to have preeminent rights to social recognition.  The State and all society must recognize the family, must protect, appreciate, and promote the family.  But the "family" here is to be understood as being the "natural society founded on marriage" between one man and one woman.

There ought to be no confusion between the family and those forms of cohabitation which mock it.  The family, "understood correctly"--that is to say, as nature and God would have it, and not the family understood however one may like--is what is to receive social priority and whose antecedent rights are to be protected.  This is not true for "all other forms of cohabitation which, by their very nature, deserve neither the name nor the status of family." (Compendium, No. 253)

The Church calls upon families to take an active, protagonistic role in forming society itself, in inculcating society and politics with its values.  "Far from being only objects of political action," the Compendium states, "families can and must become active subjects."  The Church asks families to unite, to work toward seeing that "the laws and institutions of the State not only do not offend but support and positively defend the rights and duties of the family." (Compendium, No. 247)

In short, we have plenty of PACs--Political Action Committees.  It's time we had some FACs--Family Action Committees.

The Compendium issues forth a cri-de-coeur, a cry from the heart, that there be a "family politics," one that is transformative of civil society, including its economic, social, juridical, and cultural aspects, so that civil society serves the family's needs.  Civil society must recognize the "social priority" of the family.  "To this end, family associations must be promoted and strengthened." (Compendium, No. 247) 

Not only is a "family politics" important, but a "family economics" is as well. There is a particularly significant link between family life and economic life.  The family ought in fact be a focus, "one of the most important terms of reference," when assessing economic institutions and their morality.  Economic institutions that harm the family are immoral.  The economy was made for the family, not the family for the economy.

The family must not be forgotten in the economic life of a nation.  Family life is not independent of economic life as if these two operate in two different moral realms.  True, economic life must take into account economic laws and the "broad networks of production and exchange of goods and services that involves families in continuously increasing measure." (Compendium, No. 248) 

The Church understands there are such things as economic laws.  But economic life cannot be limited to one-dimensionality, to a "market mentality" alone.  Rather, the economy must be "the logic of sharing and solidarity" not only among families, but also across generations.  For this reason, the family "must rightfully be seen as an essential agent of economic life." (Compendium, No. 248)

Labor or work is the engine that feeds the family: "Work is essential insofar as it represents the condition that makes it possible to establish a family, for the means by which the family is maintained are obtained through work." (Compendium, No. 249)  Obviously, it is work that allows the family to be supported and maintained, and this not only is a monetary sense, "since a family afflicted by unemployment runs the risk of not fully achieving its end." (Compendium, No. 249)

We hear that a family that prays together stays together.  If--as the Benedictines say--laborare est orare (to work is to pray), then we may say that a family that works together stays together.

To nurture and protect the intrinsic relationship between work and family, the Church proposes the notion of a "family wage," which she defines as "a wage sufficient to maintain a family and allow it to live decently." (Compendium, No.250)  Maintenance goes beyond subsistence, and includes a notion there ought to be an amount beyond mere subsistence so as to allow a frugal and responsible family to save money and acquire property. 

That wages lead to ownership of property--and that people do not live hand-to-mouth in a subsistence fashion--is important.  The reason for this is that ownership of property by families is a "guarantee of freedom." (Compendium, No. 250)

How the "family wage" is achieved is something open to prudential judgment.  Obviously, in a healthy economy a "family wage" will be the result of private agreement between an employer and an employee, both of whom act morally.  This is always to be preferred since it would be most respectful of liberty and consonant with the principle of subsidiarity. 

But where for whatever reason this is not occurring, the wage can be supplemented by subsidies, tax credits to the employee or employer which encourage higher effective wages, or other "forms of important social provisions to help bring it about." (Compendium, No. 250)  No way is proposed as definitive, but we are asked to apply ourselves to the problem and through prudent and perhaps novel and experimental ways seek methods that allow a family wage to be the norm and not the exception.

In modern industrialized societies, one confronts the problem of unremunerated work.  There is work done within the family--"housekeeping" by both wives and husbands--whose worth goes unpaid and often unrecognized.  For a variety of complex reasons, this was not a problem in the past.  But modern economic conditions create a situation that discourage a spouse from staying at home.  To choose to stay at home may present a serious economic sacrifice, perhaps even an economic impossibility. 

One has to recognize the value of "housekeeping" as work that directly contributes to the common good because it is "a service directed and devoted to the quality of life, constitutes a type of activity that is eminently personal and personalizing." (Compendium, No. 251)  This work ought to be "socially recognized and valued," and this in concrete terms, through some sort of "economic compensation in keeping with that of other types of work." (Compendium, No. 251)  Again, how this is achieved is something relegated to prudential judgment.  There can be tax breaks or tax credits for families that acknowledge the value of stay-at-home work.

Related to this is economics and children.  There has to be a greater symbiosis between the economy and the family so that a couple does not feel that they have to avoid having children to assure economic survival.  "[C]are must be taken to eliminate all obstacles that prevent a husband and wife from making free decisions concerning their procreative responsibilities and, in particular, those that do not allow women to carry out their maternal role fully." (Compendium, No. 251)

While the State and civil society have a responsibility to safeguard family values, to "promote the intimacy and harmony within families," to assure "respect for unborn life," and to provide for "the effective freedom of choice in educating children," one must also remember the principle of subsidiarity.  "[N]either society nor the State may absorb, substitute, or reduce the social dimension of the family; rather, they must honor it, recognize it, respect it, and promote it according to the principle of subsidiarity." (Compendium, No. 251)

-----

Andrew M. Greenwell is an attorney licensed to practice law in Texas, practicing in Corpus Christi, Texas.  He is married with three children.  He maintains a blog entirely devoted to the natural law called Lex Christianorum.  You can contact Andrew at agreenwell@harris-greenwell.com.

---

'Help Give every Student and Teacher FREE resources for a world-class Moral Catholic Education'

Copyright 2021 - Distributed by Catholic Online