Karol Wojtyła (John Paul II) on Self-Giving

Last updated on: April 19, 2017 at 10:41 pm by voxnovablog

Karol Wojtyła (John Paul II) on Self-Giving 2017-04-19T22:41:13-05:00 voxnovablog

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

In Guadium et Spes we find the following, almost paradoxical, insight, “… if man is the only creature on earth that God has wanted for its own sake, man can fully discover his true self only in a sincere giving of himself” (§ 24). Not only is this a theological-metaphysical-anthropological claim, it is also very clearly a moral and social one. One cannot be who or what he is supposed to be, metaphysically speaking, unless he first stands in relation to another or others—hence the ‘social’ dimension. Moreover, that relation to an other must be constituted through “self-giving,” a kind of giving, we are told, that must be “sincere”—hence the ‘moral’ dimension. Still, that one should find himself only be giving himself away strikes one as utterly paradoxical. In what follows, I shall turn to Karol Wojtyła (John Paul II), who spent a great deal of his intellectual energies unpacking the meaning of self-giving, to explore the meaning of this paradox.

The Phenomenon of Self-Giving

Questions pertaining both to one’s selfhood and place in reality arise and strike the reflective individual with great urgency or “inevitability” (cf. M. Heidegger, An Introduction to Metaphysics, 1) within the context of one’s everyday experience. It is within the everyday-world that one encounters arising from within his innermost depths the Socratic injunction “Know thyself;” one follows this injunction through an exploration of the phenomenon of self-giving since, upon closer examination, it becomes undeniable that giving of one’s being is particularly crucial to his own coming to self-awareness. The question “who am I?” arises and is answered within the horizon of one’s relation to others, to other selves, that is. “I am the son of my parents, the husband of my wife, the father of my children,” one may answer, and not insignificantly, each of these answers immediately reveals the relational character of one’s self. Not just a being-in-itself, one’s selfhood is also constituted through its being-in-relation.

In and through one’s very relatedness to the other, a person is revealed, first, through the constant claims that the other makes upon it—claims on one’s possessions, what he has, and claims on his very being, what he is. Think, for example, of a child’s cry for its mother’s presence, a neighbor’s plea for help, or even the state’s demand for service. In these situations, one gives himself freely—perhaps eagerly, perhaps reluctantly—to the other or others. At other times, however, one’s self may be taken through force or seductive coercion. All violent crimes clearly exemplify this but so too do those actions, Wojtyła insists, that result in the self’s being reduced to an object of use for another.

Additionally, the person reveals himself through his own reciprocal need of the other. There is, of course, a need of the other insofar as he can provide the material necessities that biological existence requires, and there is even need of the other insofar as he can provide emotional and physical needs for security. But beyond this, and more importantly, one also has need of the other as someone from whom he can receive a reciprocal self-gift. One thus finds himself in situations wherein he has a claim to another person and receives that person as a complement of his own personhood according to varying degrees. From a phenomenological perspective, then, giving and receiving seem to constitute the very fabric of one’s social interaction, indeed one’s very selfhood. And, yet, after offering this briefest of descriptions of self-giving we are still left with the question: what is the meaning of self-giving and also why is the human self constituted through its acts of giving to and receiving from an other?

Personalist Account of the Self

Wojtyła’s account of the nature and dignity of the person offered in his Love and Responsibility, I think, provides an answer to these questions. He begins that work by offering an account of the human person in terms of its subjectivity and objectivity but also in conjunction with Boethius’ classic definition, “persona est individua substantia rationalis naturae: a person is an individual substance of a rational nature” (Love and Responsibility, 22). Accordingly, Wojtyła places himself firmly within the Aristotelian metaphysical tradition, which understands the person in terms of its substantiality specifically differentiated through reason. However, he goes considerably beyond—although not contrary to—that same tradition when his account of the person unfolds in terms of an “inner subjectivity,” an “inner life of self,” (Cf. Wojtyła, “Subjectivity and the Irreducible in Man” in Person and Community (Peter Lang, 1994) proper only to persons. As Wojtyła sees it, a person’s rationality uniquely distinguishes him from all other beings in the visible world; however, he is also unique among men, having an interior life that cannot be replaced by or shared with another, which is simply to say that the person stands out in his unique objectivity and subjectivity. Wojtyła writes, “[T]he person as a subject is distinguished from even the most advanced animals by a specific inner self, an inner life, characteristic only of persons” (LR, 22). Here, rationality is seen as giving rise to consciousness, which, in turn, produces within the person a certain reflexivity of thought, as it were.

Through reflexive consciousness, man becomes aware of himself as an ‘I.’ He is thus capable of self-determination, aware of himself as a being whose actions develop his own self as well as the world. In his acts of self-determination the person actualizes his own unique personality, his selfhood, demonstrating and confirming his personhood both to himself and to the world. One’s power of self-determination, which corresponds to the faculty of free will, Wojtyła explains, functions in part to render the person alteri incommunicabilis, something unique and incommunicable. Wojtyła writes, “The incommunicable, the inalienable, in a person is intrinsic to that person’s inner self, to the power of self determination, free will. No one else can want for me. No one can substitute his act of will for mine”(LR, 24). And yet for all that, in spite of the fact that the person is a free and incommunicable subjectivity endowed with the power of self-determination, he remains, Wojtyła points out, an object, the terminus not only of his own action but of others’ actions as well.

Since the person possesses his own power of self-determination—the ability to choose freely for himself who he is—he can never be treated merely as a means to achieving what another’s will has determined as an end. Rather, as Kant argues and Wojtyła along with him, a person must always be treated as an end in itself (see Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals, 4:429). Because of the person’s inner life, through which arise his various personal structures, he cannot simply be reduced to a thing or commodity whose only value is instrumental. The only kind of authentic relationship that can exist between two persons, Wojtyła firmly insists against utilitarianism, is a relationship of love, wherein the nature of a person as an end in itself having the power of self-determination is respected and affirmed (LR, 41). But the love arising therefrom exists in varying degrees.

Beyond its forms as desire, attraction, and benevolentia (i.e., goodwill), love attains its greatest intensity and highest form in betrothed love. Resulting in a deeper and more sublime communion than the love of friendship, which is based only on goodwill, betrothed love involves a mutual self-giving or self-surrender of one person to another chosen person (LR, 96, 98). In fact, for Wojtyła, betrothed love is characterized by none other than this very giving and receiving of self. He writes, “Betrothed love differs from all [other] aspects or forms of love…. Its decisive character is the giving of one’s own person (to another). The essence of betrothed love is self-giving, the surrender of one’s ‘I’” (LR, 96).

The marital relationship between wife and husband, in which each spouse gives him or herself to the other and receives the other in return, manifests in a unique way the nature of such love. Here, a spouse’s gift of self is not understood as a making of one’s self into the other’s property to be used at will. Such an understanding of marriage would be a manifest violation of the “personalistic norm” (LR, 40, 41). For Wojtyła, the exchange of self-gifts within marriage must occur with a simultaneous affirmation of the value of that gift, that is, there must be a responsible reception of the other’s self, wherein his or her personhood is affirmed as both a good in itself and end in itself. Each spouse, through the power of his self-determination, willingly submits or subordinates him or herself to the other and, in turn, willing receives the other. Through the exchange of self-gifts two ‘I’s’ become a ‘we’—the two become one. We see then that, as Wojtyła writes, “Love is the unification of persons” (LR, 38).

Further still, while betrothed love is found in a special way within the marital relationship, Wojtyła extends its meaning to include other acts of self-giving between man and God himself (Theology of the Body, 560). For example, through the profession of religious or clerical vows, human persons freely give themselves to God wherein there is a complete and unconditional surrender of one’s freedom, of one’s very self, to God in answer to the divine call (i.e. to their religious vocation). And, of course, this act of self-giving remains reciprocal, for in return the professed receives supernatural gifts of grace through which he attains a greater share in personal or spiritual perfection, thereby imitating to a greater degree the divine being. But as absolute and unconditional as such an act of self-gift to God may be, one can still go further and will the annihilation of his very ego or ‘I,’ submitting himself to death for God’s sake. Along these lines we might consider, for instance, the autobiographical vignette that Thérèse of Lisieux offers of her own self in which she is not only willing to suffer physical death for love of God, but also spiritual death. She writes:

“One evening, not knowing how to tell Jesus that I loved Him and how much I desired that He be loved and glorified everywhere, I was thinking He would never receive a single act of love from hell; then I said to God that to please Him I would consent to see myself plunged into hell so that He would be loved eternally in that place of blasphemy”(Cited in Monica Dodds, Praying in the Presence of Our Lord with St. Thérèse of Lisieux [Our Sunday Visitor, Inc., 2004], 30).

Though she acknowledges that such a wish is somewhat childish and even “foolish”—“foolish” perhaps because such a gift of self could never be reciprocated—Thérèse nonetheless provides an example of that yearning so central to one’s personhood to give of himself—even at the cost of one’s own happiness or, here, at the cost of one’s supernatural end.

Commencing from the philosophical point of view, then, with only natural experience at our disposal, the phenomenon of self-giving and receiving appears to be, as Wojtyła describes it and rightly so, a “paradox,” (LR, 97) the same paradox found in the Gospel passage proclaiming, “He who would save his soul shall lose it, and he who would lose his soul for my sake shall find it again” (Matthew 10:39). There can be no greater paradox: that one should be directed from the very core of his being, a personal being, towards his own self-abandonment and sacrifice! Indeed, as Wojtyła sees it, this paradox is twofold: first, “that it is possible to step outside one’s own ‘I’… and secondly in that the ‘I’ far from being destroyed or impaired as a result is enlarged and enriched—of course in a super-physical, a moral sense” (LR, 97). Here, then, human reason comes up against the paradox of self-giving and, like the ocean’s waves that endlessly fail in the attempt to overtake and engulf the shore, falls short of overcoming it. In the end, while from the philosophical perspective one can indeed gain some intellectual traction in answering the question “who am I,” there remains a paradox against which human reason stands in awe, which is both the beginning and end of the philosophical act (cf. Aristotle Metaphysics I.2.982b12-14). How utterly curious that I am a self that, in its very selfhood, loses itself but in so doing fully finds and recovers itself.

Anxietas

Personalism

Philosophy

Previous Post

May 23, 2007

Human Dignity and Life Matters

Next Post

May 23, 2007 USCCB Responds to 18 Catholic Democratic Politicians

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category 2019 A Consistent Ethic of Life Aaron Weldon Abortion absurdity Abuse Scandal Academics Adoption Advent Africa agreement/disagreement with Church teaching Alexander Schmemann Alexham Alterity America Amnesty International Anarchism angels Anglicanism Animals Annual Statistics Anthony Anxietas Apocalyptic Apophatic Appalachia Aquinas Art Atheism Atonement Augustine Authority Baptism Beauty Bible biblical criticism biblical scholarship Bioethics Bishops Black Catholics Black Theology Blackadder Blogs Books Breastfeeding Brett Salkeld Buddhism Bush administration Byzantine Catholic Calvinism Canada Canon Law Capital Punishment Capitalism Caryll Houselander Catholic Blog Awards Catholic Blogging Catholic League Catholic Social Teaching Catholic Worker Movement Catholicity CFL Charity Children Chris West Christ and Culture Christian Democracy Christian Unity Christmas Christology Church Church Doctrine Church History Climate Change Cohabitation Colbert Collegiality Communion Communism Comparative Theology Competition Conferences conscience conscience rights Consequentialism Consistent Life Ethics Consumerism Contraception Contrition Conversion Converts Coptic COVID-19 Creation Critical Thinking Cross Cuba Culture Culture of Death Culture of Life Darfur David Cruz-Uribe David Wheeler-Reed Death Death Penalty Democracy Demons Desert Fathers Devil Dialogue dignity Disability Disarmament discernment Discipleship discrimination Dissent Distributism Division Doctrine Domestic Church Dorothy Day Double Effect Doubt Down syndrome Driving Early Church Easter Eastern Churches Ecclesiology Economics Economy Ecumenism Education El Salvador Election Election 2020 Ellul Embryonic Stem Cell Research Empire Energy Enlighenment Environmentalism Ephraim Radner Episcopal Church epistemology Equality Eschatology Ethics Eucharist Europe Euthanasia Evangelization Evil Evolution Excommunication F.X. Durrwell Facism Facts Fair Trade Faith Family Fashion Feddie Feminism Feminist theology Fertility Fetal Rights Fiction Film Finances First Things flags Folk Religion Food Foreign Affairs Forgiveness Frank Sheed Free Speech Freedom gay & lesbian persons Genocide George W. Bush George Weigel Gerald L. Campbell Girard/Mimetic Theory Global Warming Globalization Gnosticism Good Friday Grace Gratitude Greed Grey Cup 2009 Guadalupe Guest Post Guest Posts Gun Control Gustave Martelet Habitat for Humanity Hans Urs von Balthasar Harry Potter Hate Speech Health Health Care Healthcare Heather King Hebrew Bible Henri de Lubac Henry Karlson Herbert McCabe Heresy HHS Mandate Controversy History Holidays Holiness Holy Spirit Homiletics Homily Homosexuality Hope Hospitality How Far Can We Go? How Far Can We Go? Human Person Human Rights Humanae Vitae Humility Humor Hunger Hunting Identity Idolatry Ignacio Ellacuría Imagination Immigration In Memoriam Income Inequality Inculturation Indigenous People Individualism Inklings Intellect Interdependence Internet Interpretation Interviews Introduction Iraq War Islam Israel Jain James Alison James Martin Jazz Jesus Christ Jews Joe Biden Joe Hargrave Johann Baptist Metz John Allen John Henry Newman John Paul II John the Baptist John XXIII Jonathan Josef Pieper Joseph (the husband of Mary) Joseph Bernardin Joseph Ratzinger Josh Brumfield Journals Joy Judgment Just War Justice Kari Lundgren Karl Rahner Katerina Ivanovna Kenya Keynes Kingdom of God Kyle R. Cupp Labor Language Latin America Law Leanne Ogasawara Legion of Christ Leisure Lent Liberalism Liberation Theology Libertarianism Libya Lies Life life & dignity & responsibility of the human person Literature Little Way Liturgical music Liturgical Year Liturgy Living Simply Living Wage Local Church Lombard Lord of the Rings Louis Dupre Love M.Z. Magic Magisterium Mark DeFrancisis Mark Gordon Marriage Martin Luther Martin Luther King Jr. Martyrdom Marxism Mary Masculinity Matt Talbot Matthew Fish Matthew Levering McCain Media Memorial Day Mennonites Mental Illness mercy Michael Iafrate Middle East militarism Miroslav Volf Mitt Romney Modesty Moral Theology Morality Mormonism Morning's Minion Mother Teresa Music Muslims Natalie Nate Wildermuth Nationalism Native Americans Nature Nazis Neuhaus New Evangelization New York City News NFP nihilism Nonviolence Not Abortion Nova's Ordo Nuclear weapons Nuns Obama Occult Old Age Opus Dei Ordination ordination of women original sin Orthodoxy Oscar Romero Other Voices Pacifism Palestine Palin Papacy Papal Peace Messages Papal Social Encyclicals Particular Affections Partisanship Patriotism Paul Paul Ryan Paul VI Peace Pentimento persecution Personalism Phantastes Philosophy PKD Planned Parenthood Pluralism Poetry Policraticus Politcal Apathy Politics Poll Pope Benedict XVI Pope Francis Pope John Paul II Pope Leo XIV Population Postcolonialsim Poverty Power Prayer Preaching Predictions Predictions for 2012 President Barack Obama priestly formation & discernment Pro-Life Progress Prophetic Witness Proportionalism Public Diplomacy Public Policy Question Quotes Rachel Maddow Racism Radical Catholic Mom Radical Catholicism Raymund Schwager Real Catholic TV Real Presence Reconciliation Reginald Garrigou-Lagrange Religion religious freedom Responsibility Ressourcement Resurrection Rick Garnett Ridiculous Crap You Never Thought You'd See Robert Barron Roe v. Wade Roman Curia Rome Russia Sacraments Saints Salvation History Sam Harris Sam Rocha Same-sex Marriage Saskatchewan Roughriders Satire School of the Americas Science Scripture Seamless Garment Second Vatican Council Seeing Sex sexual violence Sexuality Sia Sin social justice Social Security Socialism Society of Jesus Sofia Loves Wisdom Solidarity Sophia soteriology Soutenus Spirituality Sports St. Dismas St. Joseph Stanley Hauerwas Statistics Stimulus Suffering Sunday Reflections Supernatural Supreme Court Symbolism Syria Taxing Technology Terrorism The State The Tea Party The Trump Administration Theological Anthropology Theology Theotokos Thomas Merton Throwaway Culture Tim Muldoon Tim Riley Tim Tebow Time Titian Tolkien Torture Toys Trade Traditionalism Transgender Transportation Transubstantiation Trinity Truth TV U.S. Affairs Uncategorized Unions unity among people who disagree US Catholicism USCCB Usury Utilitarianism Utopia Valentine's Day Vatican Vatican II Veterans Vicarious Suffering Video Violence Virgin Mary Vocations Voluntary Associations Voluntary Poverty Voting Vox Nova vox nova blog war War and Peace War Strategy Wealth Weirdness Welfare state Women Women Priests Work Woundedness Youth

Select a Month June 2026 May 2025 February 2025 January 2025 July 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 July 2023 March 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 November 2021 September 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

In Colossians, Paul says that Christ is the head of what?

Select your answer to see how you score.

The body, the church The apostles All creation The believers