-

What Is Family For?: A Christian Theology of Marriage and Family 1153

What Is Family For?

(A Christian Theology Of Marriage And Family)
3',

-~

Julie Hanlon Rubio

Justice and Passion

-~

~-

!l

In the family in which I grew up, family and community were connected. As a family, we actively
participated in a small church community; we sometimes picketed at a local grocery store in support
of the United Farm Workers; and when we came together for dinner, we often discussed social and
political Issues connected to my father's work as a lawyer for people who could not afford to pay. We
brought our individual experiences in community activities (including scouting. soccer, ballet, church
committees, and the board of a half-way house for ex-convicts) back to the family when we were
together. This enriched our conversations. Because we had experiences (both as a family and as
individuals) that went beyond our family, we had more to talk about when we were together. Our
commitments outside the family strengthened our common identity.
In this model of family life, justice and love are connected. The love among parents and children
flows outward into social, communal, and political commitments. Those same commitments
contribute to a richer culture of the family within the home. A sense of family mission energizes its
internal and external life. If one accepts the arguments made thus far in this book, some sort of
mission like this seems necessary for all Christian families. This concluding chapter suggests that
Catholic social teaching provides direction for families seeking to embrace a social mission.
However, some may fear that the movement toward a more socially concerned family means a
movement away from a family that values passionate relationships between husbands and wives,
and parents and children. Others claim that in an unl oving society, the family first and most
importantly has a mission to love. The late social critic Christopher Lasch, for instance, mourned the
loss of the family's status as a "haven in a heartless world." After hearing criticism of Lasch's
privatized notion of the family, some might argue that a haven in a heartless world is often the best
parents can offer their children, especially during the d ifficult teenage years. This view certainly has
value as a partial strategy; sometimes holding things together on the inside will be all a family can
manage. However, in the long run, the Catholic ideal of the family as domestic church with a definite
social mission has greater merit than the "haven" ideal, for if all families decided to abandon the evil
world for their small places of refuge, the world would be less graced with their presence.
Eventually, the world would intrude upon families, in spite of their efforts to secure themselves
against it, and it would hamper their efforts to be good to one another. In contrast, the Catholic ideal
can help families embrace the challenge of building loving relationships among members and
humanizing the world.
A family with a strong social commitment need not inevitably be void of strong commitments among
its members. Historian Jean Elshtain sees in many attempts to make the family more public a certain
totalitarianism that "require[s] that individuals never allow their commitments to specific othersfamily, friends, comrades-to weaken their commitment to the state." However, Elshtain presents a
false dichotomy. To ask of the family a serious public commitment is not to demand that all private
commitments end. Sometimes a family's values and actions will serve as a protest against the values

I
I 54

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ __

lu!11~l~rnl ~!~ ~uhii~

o'.__

.
. th - va lues 1n p ubl lC w a ys and
or ai-tions of the stale or community, but 1f the family wltne:>:.es to ese
h
ate and p ublic comm1tmt"nlS.
stnvt's to rh.1nl{e tht> society to which It belongs, then It serve<; bo t pn v
stnn~thentnK its 1dt'nt1ty and cohesiveness through its ctforts to tran-;form the w o r ld.
7

Could a family achieve its full potential without Involving it c;elf inte nsely in large r communmes Th1.s
:

a certain e-mpo ness 1n "

proves a d1tl1cult
question
to .mswer. H owever, th ere wo u Id s ... _ trn to .__
~
family that chooses to value itself. This emptiness resembles that w hich even ully o~eru kes 4
co1w~rsation fornsinl( only on personal concerns or a re lat1on c; h1p about only two huma n bein~ 1
thl' sho1t run, these conversations and relat1onsh1p may be sausfying. t>ven intensely so. Evenrua 11/
however, unless the two go outside of the mselves, they will have ltttle ll'ft to say o r do. UI m.Jte y,
there should be something more to relationships than "1us t the two of us:

Many philosophers who have written on friendship have made prl"et ely t his poin t RC>bert Bt>llab..
for instance, recalls Aristotle's view that a "shared commitme nt to the good constitutes the most
important component of friendship. Friends should hd p ea ch ot her be good nouns, " tor fnendsh 1p
and its vi1tues are not merely private, they are also publtc, even poltucal. fo r a OVK order. a n cy. lS
above all a network of friends." According to Ari stotle, true fn end t ke p le;isurt' in one a n ot:her's
company and in their shared commitment to the poh.s. Fo r him, a fnendsh1 p Wltho ut that cruc~ l
public d11nension Is not a true friendship at all.

If husbands and wives have true friendship, their relationship should be about mo re th.ln them.selves_
A marriage based solely on love and sacnfice of one to the other lac ks the full ness of a ma n ul
friendship in which both spouses see their love for each other as the b~ginn tng o f love for othf'rs.
Spouses who are friends can attest to the richness ot love that goes beyo nd itself. Of course, in mo~'t
cases marital love goes beyond spouses in the love for children. Many theologies of mamage see
children as tht> necessary larger component of marital love, and children do 1n tact provide a broa der
sense of purpose for most married couples. However, this does not seem quite what AnstotJe all uded
to. Friends are e<1lled upon to cart' for a wider community, for the common good or the good of the
polis. This understanding of friendship is also part of the Catholic tradtnon th.it asks tam1l1es to look
beyond themst.'lves and thereby !ind their own commitments strengthened by love for others..
By questioning the dichotomy between family and community, the Catho lic tradition encourages
families to ask. "What, ultimately, are we about?" It offers for retlection a model of the family that has
room for both the intimate passion that exists amonK parents and children and the social passion that
anim.Hes the struggle for justice in the world. In the areas of work, time, and money, it gives families
a w.1y to attach greater consideration to important social values, such as solidarity and the common
good.
DurinJ( his visit to the United States in 1999, lohn Paul II challengE>d Americans to renew their
con11n1t1rnnt to thl'lr most vulnerahle citizens and neighbors. He asked them, as he asked them ma
times helorf.', to choose life, which "involves rejectinK every form of violence: the violence of ve ny
and hunJ<f.'r, whit.:h oppresses so many human beings; the violence of armed confltet. which J::s :
resolvt> but only lnrreasE's divisions and tensions"; as well as violence against the unbor
h

h
I
.
.
n. 1n 1s
spl'cc es, t w pop1! drew upon a long and nch tradition of Catholic social teaching that em h
. lpl asizes
solidarity and the co1111non good. This body of teaching sees human persons as e

ssent1a y socraJ
b11ngs who are undblc to be fully human alone.
Rrrall that John Paul II sPes th~ mythical story of Adam and Eve in the book of G

. ..
.
.
enes1s as a story
al 11 1t th
11
" n1~c esslty of human relat1onsh1p. He emphasizes that Adam looks at all th
h I 1 t d
e creatures God

,u rea c '. P unt1 1 that point .mcl 11nds them unsuitable mates. Only when God uts Adam .
and Hec1tc.~ ~.ve from his rib does Adam, ovNcome with joy, exclaim, "This at last i~ bone of m;~~?s

I I:.:

'

What is Family For?: A Christian Theology of Marriage and Family I 155

and flesh of my flesh" (Gen 2:23). This is the first biblical story Christians read, and in it they come to
know that they are called to mutual and self-giving relationships.
What begins with Adam and Eve in the most intense fashion gets extended by analogy to all human
beings. Human beings are not meant to live alone. Rather, they are called to live in relationship-in
community-with one another. Thus they are bound to look beyond their own personal good in
order to seek the good of the larger community of persons to which they belong. In the words of the
pope, human beings have the duty to "situate particular interests within a coherent vision of the
common good." This means that individuals, and even individual families, cannot just take care of
their own. Catholic social teaching requires them to value the good of others as well. Furthermore,
Christians have a responsibility to practice the value of solidarity, which resembles the common good
in that it refers to a commitment beyond oneself and one's family, but differs in that it calls for a
specific obligation to serve and empower the poor. Valuing solidarity inevitably leads to embracing
the struggle for justice with and on behalf of the poor and marginalized.
Catholic social teaching centering on these themes addresses primarily individuals, not families.
However, the tradition holds that the family is a domestic church with both a personal and a social
vocation. Families, as small church communities, foster loving relationships, teach about the faith,
ritualize important occasions, and serve the needs of the larger church and the world. "Domestic
church" language does not simply suggest a similarity between families and churches; it insists that
families are small churches with a responsibility for fostering love within and living Christian social
values outside its boundaries. Families are communities of love with a social mission. John Paul II
has made this point more strongly than any recent pope, saying that the family is "called to offer
everyone a witness of generous and disinterested dedication to social matters through a 'preferential
option' for the poor and disadvantaged."
This social mandate of the family stands as perhaps the greatest strength of Catholic social teaching
on the family. In contrast to those who argue that being a good family is primarily a private task,
Catholic teaching emphasizes that moral thinking about the family makes sense only when done in
communal context.
The idea that families should incorporate the values of solidarity and the common good into their
lives is complemented by other aspects of Catholic teaching on the family. For instance, as chapter 3
explained, recent reforms in the Catholic wedding liturgy signal a renewed attention to ways a
couple's relationship exists in the context of the larger community. The church asks couples who
seek marriage to make the participation of those who gather for the wedding ceremony a priority in
order to underscore the idea that all who attend the wedding witness to it and are involved in the
sealing of the couple's bond. No longer can couples view their marriage as simply a union of two. Jn
the new wedding ceremony, as a couple opens itself to the community, the community promises to
support the couple in good times and bad. The new liturgy guidelines suggest that marriage, a
relationship that opens itself to all, must entail a commitment to the good of others.

-~

Similarly, as noted in chapter 5, when Pope John Paul 11 speaks directly to the family as opposed to
married couples, he asserts that families have four tasks: loving each other, serving life, serving the
church, and taking appropriate social-political action on behalf of vulnerable people in their society.
Clearly, family members are called to do more than simply love each other; their work begins but
does not end there. According to the best of the Catholic tradition, the family cannot concern itself
solely with the welfare of its own members; it has an obligation to take seriously the welfare of local,
national, and even international communities. The family is, for John Pau JI, a communion of
disciples of Christ that must situate its own good in the context of the common good and make a
commitment to serve the poor in some way.

156 I Julie Hanlon Rubio

Catholic social teaching provides a helpful starting point for thinking through the relationship
between family and society, for it calls Christian families to uphold values of solidarity and the
common good as they make the most crucial moral decisions of their lives: decisions about work,
time, and money.

e-l
~-- - 1

~l
J.

'

I,

Work

What role should work play in contemporary families? Most historians of the family agree that
families in the postindustrial world differ in fundamental ways from families in earlier times because
they do not normally find their group identity in their work. Because most families do not run farms
or shops together, the work they do no longer defines them. Rather, families stand apart from the
jobs individual parents do to support them. No longer centered around a common mission, the
family's function is uncertain. In the age of the welfare state, when many families receive from the
government services they cannot provide for themselves (like elder care, food stamps, and health
care), the function of the family grows more questionable. In recent decades, when more and more
middle-class families have begun buying services they used to perform (like meal preparation, house
cleaning. and day care), family goals have become even more uncertain. Thus today it is necessary to
ask, "What does the family do? What would it mean for the family to be itself, as John Paul II asks itto
be?"

Many would argue that the contemporary family exists primarily to nurture and support its
members. This view assumes a romantic ideal of the family and asserts the necessity of a
commitment to care for family members above all else. However, since the Catholic tradition calls
families both to nurture and to service, the family should be seen not as a haven of love but as a
community of disciples. Its members have a mission to serve one another and the world. Each family
must work out its specific mission in its own terms, but the work of adult family members will be
crucial in defining that mission. Work does not have to cease being central to a family's mission in
the postindustrial age. Rather, the work that mothers and fathers choose to do can be fundamental
to a contemporary family's public identity.
In my own family, my father's work as an attorney for the government-funded Legal Services defined
us in many ways. The relatively low pay meant that we did not enjoy some of the luxuries many of
our friends did. The political nature of the work meant that our conversations frequently centered
on politics. The public nature of the work meant that we often had to defend our values to neighbors
and friends. My father's work did not account for all that our family stood for, but it did play a major
role in forming our ideas about our ident ity as a small Christian community. My example is
undoubtedly somewhat elitist; few have the privilege my father enjoys of doing this kind of
intellectually challenging and morally invigorating work. Still, many people see work as something
more than individualistic pursuit of self-fulfillment or monetary gain. Teachers, health-care workers,
social workers, business people, day-care providers, government workers, and many others choose
their work at least in part because of their social commitments. Surely their work defines them in
significant ways and influences their families in ways no less important.
Perhaps many people in our society do not see their work as constitutive of both themselves and
their families because they see the public and private dimensions of their selves as two different
things. Robert Bellah and his colleagues argue that the lives of Americans are diminished because
they have separated themselves too much from their work and have come to see work only as a way
to secure income. These authors wish to provide people with a renewed sense of work as a calling.
Their views echo those of John Paul II in his letter on work. Recall that the pope argues that the
human person is oriented toward self-realization through work and states that a person should work
out of a desire to "realize his humanity." If work is so closely connected with the self-realization of

r
[
!

'

What is Family For?: A Christian Theology of Marriage and Family 1157

Christians, then parental work cannot help but be a fundamental aspect of a family's self-realization
as a community of disciples.
Contemporary culture resists the notion of work as an ethically important dimension of family life.
Many would agree with a well-known social commentator who argues that "parents who have
satisfied their elementary economic needs [should] invest themselves in their children by spending
less time on their careers and consumeristic pursuits and more time with their youngsters."
Certainly the first five years of a child's life are a particularly important time during which it would,
in most cases, prove beneficial for parents to have greater flexibility in their work hours. However,
as chapters 5 and 6 show, the notion that only elementary economic needs can compete with the
needs of children for full-time parental nurturing is disputed by those who argue that full-time care
for young children, mostly on the part of the mother, is not necessary or even desirable. Some of
these writers are concerned about the role of women in society; they point to the possible
destructive consequences of the isolated mother and child and speak to the need of women to
participate in the larger public world. Others denigrate this need for public work as selfish.
However, the desire to contribute to one's community is what Catholic teaching calls a commitment
to the common good.
Putting the "self-less attempts of parents to meet the needs of their families in radical opposition to
the "selfish" pursuits of parents in the public sphere misunderstands something very basic. When
parents decide how to balance the demands of the workplace with the demands of family members
(especially children), they often struggle with the problem of balancing their family's needs with the
needs of students, patients, clients, or causes they serve. According to Catholic teaching, parents
have a duty to care for their children, but they also have a duty to contribute to the community
through work. They cannot abandon their obligations to the common good simply because they have
children. They should be encouraged to consider how they might best serve members of the
community through their work. While raislng children necessitates some downscaling of public
commitments, parents need not feel that they must sacrifice all social concern for the sake of their
children.
The work vs. family dilemma is not simply a question of individualism vs. self-sacrifice for a greater
good. In reality. many goods are at stake when parents make decisions about work: the benefits of
parents' spending time with their children, the benefits of children's exposure to different adult role
models, the gifts parents have to offer to communities. Questions regarding the ethics of work, when
viewed in the larger context of solidarity and the common good, become more difficult, but more
properly situated for a Christian discussion of what the family is about.

Time

Questions about work are intimately related to questions about time, for most families feel that they
lack the time to be the kind of families they want to be. Even if families commit to work for the
common good. they also need time for themselves. An often-cited 1989 survey of American families
reported that most Americans see lack of time as the crucial problem facing families today. Lack of
family time affects not only parents who work more and consequently see their children less.
Children today also see their grandparents, aunts, and uncles less because of increased mobility.
Parents see their teenage sons and daughters less because more of them work part-time. Husbands
and wives find it harder to take time for each other. Most agree that more time would help them and
others to be better families. Anyone who has experienced the pressures of contemporary family life
would doubtless agree. Time poses a serious problem for many families. If society values families, it
certainly should make it possible for families to spend more time together.

158 I Julie Hanlon Rubio

Some changes are already occurring. The government has finally made twelve weeks of unpaid
family leave a given for large businesses, and more employers offer flextime, job sharing, or reduced
hours for reduced pay. Many people are forced to work part-time; others choose to work part-time
or downsize into less demanding jobs because they want more time with those they love most.
What, then, can be done with this time? Why do families want time? There is a danger that more
family time will simply encourage greater privatization in American culture. If families simply spend
more time together at the mall or in front of the TV set, they will have gained little. Yet many families
may find it hard to think of time any differently. As sociologist Robert Bellah notes, Americans have
developed a very private ideal of leisure. Especially since the rise of the middle class after World War
II, private leisure came to be seen as the most important element of the good life, for "here intimacy,
solidarity, and voluntary accomplishments in sport, art, or craft flourished, crowned life, and made it
whole." The family gathered around the TV set or the backyard barbecue became the symbol of
success.
Catholic social teaching calls this idealization of private leisure into question and asks families to
think not only of their own interests, but also the interests of those in their communities most in
need of help. To be valuable, the time families spend together need not be private. In fact, Bellah
claims that most people derive little satisfaction from the most typical of leisure activities, TVwatching. He argues that when we engage in leisure that is "mildly demanding but inherently
meaningful-reading a good book, repairing the car, talking to someone we love, or even cooking the
family meal-we are more apt to find that we are 'relaxed."' Would not leisure spent in activities
that help others have a similar effect?

....

Significantly, Catholic social teaching calls families to spend some time serving the common good and
practicing solidarity. Families might serve the common good in a variety of ways, including
volunteering at the school their children attend, participating in civic or religious organizations, and
becoming active in their own neighborhood. All of this contributes to the common good. However, if
middle-class families serve only other middle-class families, then the common good is only partly
realized and solidarity with the poor and marginalized remains a distant ideal.
The Parenting for Peace and justice Network, based in St. Louis, gives an example of an alternative
model. Families who belong to the network engage in service activities together, share ideas about
how to live more simply, and believe it is possible to parent well without abandoning a strong
commitment to those in need. The growing Voluntary Simplicity movement, which involves people
all over the country who attempt to Jive on less money, scale back work commitments, and spend
time doing what they really want to do, also emphasizes community service.
Families can use more time to build their own small community of disciples by serving the common
good. Each family must decide on its own specific mission. What is important is that they use the
time they gain not to isolate themselves from society but to gain the freedom and space they need to
think about what they can do together for others.

Money

How do commitments to solidarity and the common good affect families' choices about how to spend
money? Is this an important ethical question? Some might argue that spending is a private issue
because each family is different and spends relatively little in comparison to business or
governments. Contemporary culture tends to trivialize this aspect of the moral life, ignoring the
reality that the way families choose to spend their money significantly affects their lives and the lives

IL1

~
L_
~

~
~
~!

Fl
. -~
----~
I

What is Family For? : A Christian Theology of Marriage and Family I 159

of others. However, if one takes Catholic social teaching seriously, financial decisions have ethical
import.
In contrast, a 1995 story from the Business Section of the Los Angeles Times provides readers with a
map showing how an average college-educated couple can buy a house, send their kids to college,
and live comfortably while saving enough to become millionaires by the time they retire. It suggests
that most families can get out of debt and achieve the same goal by following the prudent example of
this ideal couple. What is presented as a simple article on personal finances is in fact a statement of
important values. This couple has one major goal in life: wealth. They succeed because, after more
than forty years of frugality, they end up as millionaires who can spend their time travelling around
the world. To achieve their goal. the couple relies upon two steady, uninterrupted incomes. The map
does not allow for exploring different career options, volunteering. or easing workloads when
children arrive. It does not consider the social import of the couple's work or the fact that they will
miss out on time alone, time with children, and time spent in nonlucrative community activities. The
money the couple earns goes directly into necessary expenditures and long-term investments. The
ethical values controlling their decisions about work, time, and money are personal security in the
present and personal wealth in the future. There is no room for consideration of solidarity or the
common good. The family is treated as a private community that does well when it meets its own
needs. The article assumes readers will consider this family a good role model. Yet, considering
what values this family denies in order to gain material success, their priorities should not be
accepted too quickly.
Pope John Paul II calls that model into question when he asks families to consider seriously the
ethical import of their way of life:
I wish to appeal with simplicity and humility to everyone, to all men and women without
exception. I wish to ask them to be convinced of the seriousness of the present moment
and of each one's individual responsibility, and tu implement- by the way they live as
individuals and as families, by the use of their resources, by their civic activity, by
contributing to economic and pol itical decisions and by personal commitment to
national and international undertakings--the measures inspired by solidarity and love
of preference for the poor.

1_._,,
L- ~
I

'

John Paul II finds lifestyles and expenditures extremely important Christian families cannot claim to
uphold values of solidarity and the common good simply by voting for the right candidates or
supporting the right causes. They must scrutinize their daily lives and their use of resources, asking
whether their use of resources is consistent with the values they uphold in the public sphere. They
do not live in isolation, because everyone is connected to everyone else by seemingly mundane
choices that have social import. According to Catholic social teaching "we are all really responsible
for all.H

Most families, not accustomed to hearing this emphasis in Catholic thought, think of their economic
decisions primarily in terms of making ends meet and giving what is left over to charity. However, if
values like solidarity and the common good are family values, then this is inadequate. The Catholic
moral vision speaks to the broader ethical responsibilities of families with regard to money.

! ~

American Catholic families hear this message but often feel stretched to their limit They work hard
and yet seem to have less than their parents did. As continuing debates over tax breaks for the rich
suggest, even those who earn $100,000 or more do not see themselves as wealthy. The deep
dissatisfaction of the middle class means that most families feel that they do not have the luxury of
sharing more of what they have.

1 --~

- - -- - - - -- - - - - --

,...~~~~~~~~~~--------------------------------------------------------~=-

160 I Julie Hanlon Rubio

Families at the bottom of the income distribution really are limited by their lack of ability to fill basic
needs. Still, the American ideology of consumerism makes most families' lives much emptier than
they might be. This ideology constrains their choices, eats up their time, denies them happiness, and
constricts their ability to act on commitments to the common good. Even those who recognize their
own excesses find it difficult to break free of something so pervasive. Families of all income levels
consider themselves needy. The process by which desires have become needs is not clear.
Where does this dissatisfaction come from? Catholic ethicist John Kavanaugh's book Following Christ
in a Consumer Society gives a particularly vivid account of the destructive force of an ideology fed by
dissatisfaction. Kavanaugh attempts to illustrate this phenomenon by comparing a family content
with a relatively simple lifestyle to a family dissatisfied with internal relationships and simple
pleasures, one that turns to consumer culture for pleasure. Of the first family he writes, "If you just
like talking to people, visiting them, spending time in conversation with them, if you enjoy living
simply, if you sense no need to compete with your friends or neighbors-what good are you
economically in terms of our system? You haven't spent a nickel yet." The second family is, of course,
very good for the American system, because it wants too much. Kavanaugh points out that capitalism
as an economic system needs dissatisfaction in order to survive. It encourages people to feel
unhappy with what they have and urges them to seek fulfillment in consumption.
At the same time, consumerism discourages intimacy, relationships, and respect for persons as they
are. It makes families feel they must keep up with everyone else. They end up working longer hours,
spending ever more time shopping, and buying things they cannot afford on credit cards that keep
them tied to working too much in jobs they do not like. Families fill the emptiness the culture
creates in them with things, and persons necessarily become secondary. There is no time or space
for valuing relationships with family and friends, let alone making room in their lives for the poor.
Kavanaugh rightly contends that consumerism functions as a kind of armor isolating people from
their friend s and family and allows them to refuse to hear the cries of the poor. When so many
American families, who are so much better off than most other families in the world, feel unable to
commit themselves in solidarity to the world's le3st fortunate, something is wrong. Social analysis
exposes the power of the ideology that significa ntly impacts family economic decisions and may
allow families to think serious ly about how they can better value solidarity and the common good in
their lives.
Consider the case of the Murphys, a family of six in Washington, D.C. Bill and Sharon Murphy have
run a shelter for homeless fa milies for over twenty years. They live in the main building of the
shelter with their four children and two homeless families. Over the years, they have financed and
renovated several other bu ildings, so that they now help many more families make the transition
from the streets to their own homes. They receive only small stipends for their work and have lived
simply for all of their married life. The Murphy's simple lifestyle, hospitality, refusal to work merely
for money, and general valuing of persons over things challenges all families who seek to fulfill a
commitment to the common good. The Murphys have found an extraordinary way of making
economic decisions that value family and community. Few families will be called to this kind of life,
but it is important to hear stories that illustrate so well the social values families are called to
embrace. Other families make smaller sacrifices-sharing a home so that they can do the work they
love, living and working in their inner city, or opening their home to women or children in need of
temporary refuge. These models challenge middle-class lifestyles and provide inspiration for
families seeking to move beyond the popular but unnecessary dichotomy between family and
community.

What Is Family For?: A Christian Theology of Marriage and Family 1161

---.....

~
I
I

--~

~
T~
~

---l._

The Family Meal

Many contemporary commentators on the family speak of the demise. of t~e fa~ily m.eal as a symbol
of the decline of the family. They argue that the restoration of this daily ntual is cruc1~l to the health
of family life. Robert Bellah even goes so far as to call the family dinner hour a m1ss1~g sacrament,
and he worries about what happens to families when no one has time to prepare or s~t down for a
common meal. Bellah identifies several fundamental aspects of the sacramental meal: time together,
a commitment to limit work so that time is available, a corresponding willingness to forgo the extra
money that work would bring in, and a shared responsibility for the meal that assumes both husband
and wife have public commitments outside the home. A Catholic understanding of a sacramental
family meal would presume all of this and something more. Sacraments in the Catholic tradition are
about unity and action. Sacraments concern what the church is in itself and what the church does for
society in order to become itself. A Catholic sacramental understanding of the family meal reveals in
a profound way that the family is a community that, like the church, has duties both to itself and to
society.
What would a Catholic understanding of a sacramental family meal look like? Catholic theologian
David Hollenbach claims that sacramental celebrations provides important insights into the Church's
social role, and he uses the Eucharist to illustrate his point. Since in the Eucharist sharing food
symbolizes the unity of all persons in Christ, he believes that it makes sense to think of feeding the
hungry as a central part of the Christian mission. Holl enbach sees in the sacramental meal a moral
imperative. In the sharing of food, Christians celebrate who they are. If sharing food was Jesus' way
of symbolizing his commitment to the earliest Christian community and, ultimately, to all people,
Christians must also share food in and with their com munities.
Significantly, many New Testament texts identify Jesus as someone who eats with sinners. Many
times when eating with friends he also welcomed t he marginalized in his own society. This included
those considered unclean, tax collectors, and prostitutes. Jesus refus ed to turn anyone away from a
table at which he was eating. This was a powerful witness in his times, and many of his
contemporaries criticized him for it. Jesus made inclusivity an important ethical norm in his
ministry. The Jesus who preached that the last would be first, told the story of Lazarus and the rich
man, and announced that those who fed the hungry and clothed the naked would be on the right side
on judgment Day, also made sure that the meals to which he was invited were celebrations of all
God's people. Thus when Jesus finally gathered the disciples for the last supper the night before he
died and, as john has it, washed their feet, he told them once again who he was and who they must
be-and he told them with a meal, a meal that became the model for the church's Eucharist Meals
that the church celebrates, then, ought to reflect some of this concern for social justice.
If one can think of a Christian family as a "domestic church," one can consider their meal, in some
sense, Eucharistic. In a traditional Catholic sense, it can be thought of as a sacramental (a vehicle of
God's grace) like holy water or the rosary. The family meal, like the Eucharist, is important, not
because it is the high point of the family's life, but because it symbolizes what the family is and what
it does. If the family meal is neglected, not only do the relationships among family members suffer
but so does the sense of what the family is about The meal brings the family together and provide~
an opportunity for shared talk, celebration, and mission.

Jn my own family, dinner conversations about my father's work as a lawyer became fundamental to
the identity of all t.h~ee childre.n.. !hey .influenced our career choices, shared our politics, and gave us
a strong sense of c1v1c respons1b1hty. S1m1larly, my parents took up into their own lives and identitie
their children's challenges in journalism, theatre, debate, and youth groups. Both kinds osf
conversations led into discussions of larger social issues. Both brought our family closer together.

162 I Julie Hanlon Rubio

As we shared stories about our work and argued about our values, we became more a part of each
other's life. We grew as a family because we took the time to talk, and because we had something
bigger than ourselves to talk about.
Now, with my husband often years and my three young sons, I am trying to create my own version of
this family ritual. As my children are all under the age of nine, just getting them to sit down with us
for ten minutes without spilling anything is an accomplishment. Still, we pray, thanking God for
everything from rain to Star Wars, we invite friends and family over as much as possible, and we try
to maintain an inclusive table where all who wish to join us are welcome. Little by little, we are
beginning to talk about serving the poor and the larger social issues everywhere around us. In the
ritual of the family meal, I hope that my children will discover, as I did, much about what it means to
be a Christian.

---~
t_J

If family meals are to be sacramental, they must be about more than just family members, just as the
Eucharist is about more than just the church. Families are public as well as private, concerned with
both love and justice. Families should share meals together not only so that their members may
enjoy each other's company and solidify bonds that will be crucial to all members, but also because
families are small communities with social missions. If families do not gather as communities of love
in their homes, they cannot then be communities of love for the world, but if they gather only to love
themselves, they do less than the Christian tradition requi res of them. Families are called to and
capable of much more.

++++

Source: Julie Hanlon Rubio, "What Is Family Forr in A Christian Theology of Marriage and Family
(New York: Pau\ist Press, 2003), 183-199.

L :.

....

&.....

I
I

I
Saving and Strengthening the Filipino Family 1163

I
I

-- ...~

Saving And Strengthening The Filipino Family:

A CBCP Pastoral Statement
on the 20th Anniversary of Familiaris Consortio
Catholic Bishops' Conference of the Philippines

--;-i

..

--~

I
I

I
I
Introduction
I

"Family, become what you are!" Twenty years ago, Pope Paul Paul II wrote these stirring words in
his apostolic exhortation, Familiaris Consortio (The Role of the Christian Family in the Modern World,
November 22, 1981). How increasingly urgent and contemporary this call is for all of us.
Let us briefly survey the situation of the Filipino today and recall what the Papal document teaches
us so that our path to save and strengthen the Filipino family may be illuminated.
The Situation of the Filipino Family

...

-- (I

In 1981, the Pope described the global situation with regard to the family: The family in the modern
world, as much as and perhaps more than any other institution, has been beset by the many profound
and rapid changes that have affected society and culture (FC, 1). The family "is the object of
numerous forces that seek to destroy it or in some way to deform it" (FC, 3). Twenty years later, the
Pope would write about the family in the same vein: "... this fundamental institution is experiencing
a radical and widespread crisis" (Novo Millennia lneunte, January 6, 2001, no. 47).
The words of the Pope would aptly describe the sitl!ation of the Filipino Family today.
Admittedly we still place great value on the family (For the situation of the Filipino family, see also
The Catechism for Filipino Catholics {CFC], nos. 1006-11). We are justifiably proud of our close family
ties. In the family we find strong support and environment for our growth. We continue to value
marriage highly. We firmly believe that children are treasures given by the Lord to be loved and
nourished. We extend extraordinary care at home to our elderly. Despite many difficulties the
Filipino Family remains quite stable.
Providing strong support for family values, our 1987 Philippine Constitution has a marked pro-family
and pro-life stance. It declares, "The State recognizes the sanctity of family life and shall protect and
strengthen the family as a basic autonomous social institution" (Art. 2, Sec. 12). A whole article is
devoted to the Family (Article 15), a feature absent in previous Constitutions. It acknowledges that
marriage is "an inviolable social institution" that must be protected by the State. It respects the right
of couples to found and raise a family according to their religious convictions. It protects the unborn
from the moment of conception. It guarantees our right to profess and live our faith freely.
Unfortunately, many soci~l situations are beginning to destr~y or deform the family. Today, many
Catholics hve together without the benefit of a Church marnage, thus depriving themselves of the
sacrame.n~ _~f marria~e . and the sacramental grace they need in order to carry out their
respons1b1ht1es as Chnst1an couples and parents. Often there is little preparation for marriage, and

164 I Catholic Bishops' Conference of the Philippines

couples are rushing into marriage without really knowing each other's values that would firmly
preserve their marriage through periods of hardship and pain. Pre-marital pregnancy and elopement
are sadly common. Economic factors threaten the unity of marriage. The forced separation of a
husband from his wife or of both from their children due to overseas work is causing great suffering
in the family. In all cases, the children suffer. In many cases they suffer serious psychological harm.
Sometimes, separation results in the break-up of families.
Moreover, the infidelities of some public officials and media personalities cause grave scandal and at
the same time lead to a lowering of the esteem for marital fidelity. Eroticism in our society in the
form of various levels of pornography is also weakening the marriage bond as well as the sense of the
sacredness of the gift of sexuality. Drug trafficking, the use of illegal drugs, and drug related crimes
contribute to the destruction of peace and unity in the family and in the community. Finally, socalled modern ideas from supposedly developed countries penetrate our culture trough mass media
and insidiously deform family values and degrade our traditional esteem for marriage, family, and
human life.
Compounding our tragedy today is the fact that our legislators have introduced proposals that, we
firmly believe, will ultimately destroy the family as our religious faith understands it. Now in the
legislature are bills allowing absolute divorce, removing the constitutional prohibition of abortion,
and more aggressively pushing population control through contraception, sterilization and, yes, even
abortion. We hear suggestions about same sex unions as the basis for alternative families. In schools
are programs of sex education that fail to inculcate the values that would safeguard life and the
sacredness of the gift of sex.

- l
__.

CJ

,,.

'

-~

The Teachings of Familiaris Consortlo

In the light of our situation today we must take guidance from the teachings of the Holy Father
(Some of these teachings are also treated in CFC, nos. 1012-27).
MFamily, become what you are!" The family must truly become "an intimate community of life and
love" (Gaudium et Spes, 48, cited in FV, 17). The family has "the mission to guard, reveal and
communicate love," a love that "reflects God's love fo r humanity and the love of Christ for the Church
his bridge" (FC, ibid.).
Following the 1980 Synod of Bishops on the Family, f'am iliaris ConsorUo emphasized four general
tasks for the family (FC, ibid.r
a)
b)
c)
d)

Forming a community of persons;

Serving life;
Participating in the developme nt of society;
Sharing in the life and mission of the Church.

Forming Community, Saying No to Divorce

The first task of the family is "to live in fid elity the reality of communion" (FC, 18) between husband
and wife, between parents and their children. Communion is founded on love. Marriage is a
covenant of love between husband and wife. By such a covenant, they "are no longer two but one
flesh." Thus, from the beginning, marriage is indissoluble. "What therefore God has joined together,
let no man put asunder" (Mt 19:6 ).
........

,
I

.>- --

----L'i.ri
!

I .i.'\

-'"--

Saving and Strengthening the Filipino Family j J 65

~ -i
I

J___

t-1<
I

--;--~,

r~

l~
t~

-""'---~

l~

[ .!
=~
I ~
..L

.L1'
~

...:

i3

Husband and wife are "called to grow in communion through day-to-day fidelity to their m~rriage
promise of total mutual self-giving." They are called and commanded, "beyond every . tnal a_nd
difficulty," to remain faithful to one another, reflecting the "unconditional faithfulness With which
God loves his people" (FC, 20). The power of the grace of marriage is much more than any difficulty
husband and wife have to face.
We must, therefore, continue to be vigilant against proposals for absolute divorce and persistently
teach against marital infidelity (Mk 101-12; Mt 5:27-28). At the same time, we must offer help to
troubled marriages and strengthen the commitment of married couples.
Conjugal communion is the basis of communion between parents and children, between sisters and
brothers (FC, 21). It is love that animates the interpersonal relationships of the different members of
the family. In their reception of the Sacraments and as a gift of the Holy Spirit, the natural
communion of love links them with Christ and the people of God (FC, foe. Cit). Day by day the
members of the family must build up this communion of persons by their "care and love of the little
ones, the sick, the aged," by their "sharing of goods, of joys and of sorrows" (FC, ibid.). Only through a
great spirit of sacrifice, forbearance, pardon and reconciliation can family communion be preserved
and perfected (FC, ibid.).

Serving Life, Rejecting Anti-Life Mentality and Policies

The second task of the family is to serve life. Husband and wife are cooperators in the love of God the
Creator. They cooperate in "transmitting by procreation the divine image from person to person."
This gift of life is not only physical. It is "enlarged and enriched by all those fruits of moral, spiritual
and supernatural life which they hand to their children and through the children to the Church and to
the world" (FC, 26 ). Parents also serve life by educating their children. They have the primary
responsibility of educating their children "in the essential values of human life" (FC, 37), such as a
correct attitude of freedom, a sense of true justice, and even more importantly a sense of true love,
especially of the poor. "The family is the first and fundamental school of social living" (FC, ibid.). It is
the task of parents "to give their children a clear and delicate sex education" (FC, ibid.), that brings
them "to a knowledge of and respect for the moral norms" that guarantee "responsible personal
growth in human sexuality" (FC, ibid.).

I
..;_.)
.,,L_

t~

I-

l.

-t

J ":'I
J Si
I
... Vf
I

J rt
j

j ....

.u l.J

Even as children are precious gifts of God, we must realize that "responsible parenthood" has to be
exercised. Parents "should strive to beget only those children whom they can raise up in a human
way. Towards this end they need to plan their families according to the moral norms taught by the
Church" (PCP-11, no. 583), faithfully respecting "the inseparable connection between the unitive and
procreative meanings of human sexuality" (FC, 32).
In the light of perennial Church teaching we, therefore, fundamentally reject the assumptions that
underpin the government's population program. We also object to the lack of practical respect for
moral and religious convictions that sometimes accompanies it. We forcefully reject the
contraceptive, sterilizing and abortifacient means it uses. We want an assurance that sex education
programs for the young will impart values consistent with their faith.

Renewing Society and the Church

The third and fourth tasks of the Christian family are: participation in the development of
society and sharing in the life and mission of the Church.

!,

,,I

166 I Catholic Bishops' Conference of the Philippines

The very experience of communion and sharing that should characterize the family's daily life
represents its first and fundamental contribution to society" (FC, 43). This authentic communion is a
stimulus for the broader community relationships marked by respect, justice, dialogue and love"
(FC, ibid.). As a consequence, we strongly advocate "family politics," by which families politically
intervene so 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" (FC, 44). By family politics they assume
responsibility for transforming society and fulfill "the kingly mission of service in which Christian
couples share by virtue of the sacrament of marriage" (FC, 4 7).

.LJ.

J___
L

1-L

In serving the Church, families share in the Church's mission. Such service should "follow a
community pattern: the spouses together as a couple, the parents and children as a family (FC, 50).
The family expresses and realizes its "participation in the prophetic, priestly, and kingly mission of
Jesus Christ and of his Church" through the "love between husband and wife and between members
of the family" (FC, ibid.}. The witnessing of such love by the family demonstrates that the family is
both a believing and evangelizing community.

L1.

Today in practically all dioceses in the Philippines there are diocesan and parish programs of Family
and Life. These help parents fulfill their duties and responsibilities toward their families, toward the
Church and toward society. We are also gratified to see Catholic movements like the Parish Renewal
Experience (PREX}. Christian Family Movement, Human Life International, Marriage Encounter
groups, Couples for Christ. Familia, Abay Familia, and many other similar groups do their part to
renew and uplift the quality of our society's political, economic, and moral life. We hope that they
will help all couples in an even greater measure to achieve the tasks of Christian families.
.L
'..!.

Promoting Social Justice, Eradicating Poverty

ll!
..i.

We strongly urge all Filipinos, especially those a lready engaged in the family apostolate, to direct

their special atte nt ion to two concerns. The first 1s pove rty, Poverty is the silent killer of families. It
forces many spouses to separate for pu r poses of work. It makes the m vulnerable to pressures that
ru in their esteem for life. Destitution ma kes it difficult and sometimes almost impossible for them to
observe t.he divine law (cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, no. 1887}. Poverty is not God's will.
Poverty is an enemy of love and life. In many ways it is co ntra ry to human dignity. We must work to
eradicate it In a country whe re the great divide between the ma ny poor and the few rich seems
unbridgeable, we must all wo rk toward social justice, the justice of the common good, the justice that
morally demands equitable distribution of the country's goods.
We call on government to put into practice what it has decla red as a policy, namely, poverty
eradication. Special priority must be given to hou si ng, educatio n, a nd medical care for the poor. We
also call upon government leaders to eradicate graft a nd corruption since this terrible social injustice
is nothing else but thievery of the grossest kind, th e stealing of incredible amounts of public funds
that could have benefited millions of our poor people.
We call upon business leaders to place the interests of the poor above the natural desire to earn the
greatest profit We urge everyone who as the means, to help set up livelihood and employment
opportunities especially in these difficult times.
Our final destiny is determined by what we do to the poor. Christ said, "Amen, I say to you, whatever
you did for one of these least brothers of mine, you did it for me .... amen, I say to'you, what you did
not do for one of these least ones, you did not do for me" (Mt 25:40, 45 ).

:J.

r
-~

Saving and Strengthening the Filipino Family 1167

- L~

C\:
Renewtng the Culture of the Family
The other grave concern today is the purification and moral renewal of the family itself. The family is
the origin of many cultural distortions that lie at the root of our problems as a people" (National
Pastoral Consultation on Church Renewal, January 2001). Parental behavior, good or bad, is passed
on as an example to children. Sadly, the degradation of moral values through crime and vice is what
is most visible to children as they observe adults, watch movies and television, or listen to Senate
investigations of alleged crimes. Moreover, a materialistic and secularist global culture is impacting
the Filipino family quite severely.

- ~
-~

In the Filipino fam ily. the n, we see distorted values. For instance, while we appreciate the closeness
of fam ily me mbers, we need to correct the c1osed family" mentality, which makes of the family an
idol t.o which t.he common good is often sacrificed. This idol becomes the cause of graft and
corruption, and drives some officials to think more of enriching their fam ilies rather than of
promoti ng the good of al l. In contrast, the fam ily should be the first school of integrity and justice, of
peace and love.

MakJng the hmlly a School of Holiness

On October 21, 200 1 t he Holy Father. Pope John Pa ul II, beatified the spouses Luigi and Maria
Belt rame Quanrocch1. the first t ime in the history of the church that husband and wife were beatified
togethe r in the same ceremony. Blessed Luigi died in 1951 and Blessed Maria followed in 1965.
They had four ch ildren. The three living childre n, two priests and one lay woman. were at the
beat1ficat1on of their parents. who "lived an ordinary life in an ext raordinary way. Among the joys
a nd anxieties of a normal family, they knew how to live a n extraordina rily rich and spiritual life"
(Po pe John Paul II, Ho mily ac the Mass of Beatification. How truly wonde rful a re the ways of God! The
beatification event reveal s the capacity fo r mutual sanctification in marriage.

-~

The life together of Blessed Luigi and Mar ia as s pouses and p;irents illustrates the necessity and
im portance of the Church's teachings. Th e sacrament of marriage is a holy sacrame nt lived out in the
reallnes of con1ugal a nd family li fe. Mam age is a call for mutual sanctificati on. The grace of the
sacramen t nou ri shes and su pports marriage and helps spou8ses to transform their lives into a
"sp1ntual sacrifice" (see FC, 56) The Euchanstic sacnfice "Christia n spouses e nco unter the source
from w hich their own marriage covenant flows" (FC, 57). In the sacrament of reco nciliation, they
receive pardon a nd lorg1 veness tor their ta1J...ires as spo uses (FC. 58), as well as the grace of re newal.
In the Philippines, it is very tragic that many fathers do not provide a n exam ple, much less
leadership. for their children in this funda mental area of prayer. Praye r is not a lu xury. It is
necessary a nd indispensa ble. Even Christ prayed. Fathers must likewise pray with and for their
fam ilies. Th rough the family's prayer, God makes the fa mily a sa nctified a nd sa nctifying fa mily.

The Family, the Focal Point of Evangelization

-.,

.
. L:.:

In the light of our o bservat ions. the Fil ipin o fa mily has to open up to the great concerns of the
community, the country, a nd the Church. 'The fu t ure of huma nity passes by way of the fa mily" ( FC,
86 ). For the fa mily is the firs t and vital cell of society. It is also the domestic Church, the Church in
the ho me, a communi ty of love a nd life.

/
/

-
168 I Catholic Bishops' Conference of the Philippines

"Family, become what you are!H For this to take place, the Filipino family has to become the focus of
evangelization as the 2001 National Pastoral Consultation on Church Renewal enjoined. Today the
family needs deep renewal so that it can be a more effective agent of evangelization. We must make
every effort to ensure that the family is where the Gospel is first heard and witnessed to by the
members. The family has to become a true school of evangelization, where very member first learns
to participate in the evangelizing mission of the Church. It should also be a school of holiness. The
whole family would then become a witness of the Gospel to other families and to the wider society.
For our part, we your Bishops recommit ourselves to saving and strengthening the Filipino family.
Personally or through our pastoral programs we shall assist and encourage families struggling in
situations of great difficulty and striving to cope with the burdens of life. In every diocese in the
Philippines, we will strive to make the family the focus of evangelization. We will use the resources
the Lord has entrusted to us in order to achieve all that we have urged you to do, all that Pope asks us
to achieve.

.-

_.,.

'

--------

:...-~

I 9'

:..---- -

-.:____ .
T
~

~ i

2.

1 -i

- - -

L__!
.J.

Conclusion

- - !ti
l__

It is in putting into practice and applying to our present situation the teachings of Familiaris
Consortio that we most fittingly celebrate the twentieth anniversary of this great document on the
Family.

.J.

'

_L_

..r

May the Holy Family at Nazareth, the family of Jesus, Mary, and Joseph, bless us all and obtain for all
Filipino families the great blessings of becoming the home and seedbed of holiness, peace, unity, and
progress in our land. May the Blessed Virgin Mother, Mary, the Queen of the Family, whose children
we are, protect the Filipino family and bring it ever closer to her own Son, Jesus, the Savior of every
family.

-~ -'c..:

'

-u
.JI

For the Catholic Bishops Conference of the Philippines:

+Orlando B. Quevedo, O.M.l.
Archbishop of Cotabato
President, Catholic Bishops' Conference of the Philippines
02 December 2001

....11
.....

...

++++

Source: CBCP, Saving And Strengthening The Filipino Family: A CBCP Pastoral Statement
on the Z01h Anniversary of Pamiliaris Consortia, 2001,
http:/ /www.cbcponline.net/ documents/2000s /html/ 2001-familiaris_consortio.html
(accessed February 2012).

.ll_
..\.:_

-,