Community or communality is a value and a model of life. It differs both from an individualistic and from a collectivist way of conceiving relations between individuals and society, and between the common good and that of individuals. From a sociological point of view, communality means a pattern of conduct of individuals in important domains of social life consisting in societal actions, co-responsibility and decision making; this is in contrast to an individualistic or herd-like form of action. It means also a sociocentric orientation of individuals. It is their conviction, view, and feeling that the good, goals, needs, and interest of individuals has always in the past, is now, and will in the future be achieved best by means of a co-responsible realization of the common good, that is, the good of all persons united in common action. In this sense, communality as a desired model of life appears in the social consciousness as a value.

Thus understood, communality asserts itself in four most essential domains of individual and social life, that is: family life, local communities, religious groups, and political life. As communality in family life was broadly discussed in the chapter "Family – Family Values -- Home", here we shall focus on the three other spheres of life.

Village communities regulated the three field system of use of land (based on a specific division of the land); the use of common grounds (nawsie) in the middle of villages, as well as of forests, meadows and pastures; the provision of mutual help in field and construction work, the borrowing of tools, etc. These communities coordinated all domains of life by informal methods of communication, creating specific forms of customs and systems of informal sanctions.

People’s needs in such domains as information, social life, entertainment, or free time were satisfied through the formation of specific village "news centers" and "institutions" of cultural life in houses of local story tellers, authorities or craftsmen, in village inns and in front of churches.

Traditional local communities satisfied people’s needs for social esteem and for the evaluation of conduct by the opinion of village members which punished by means of informal but sharp sanctions.

This informal organization of villages became insufficient when, as early as in the XIXth century, the nobility and aristocracy lost their titles as owners of patrimonial villages and towns. This was replaced due to the enfranchisement of peasants and their being granted ownership of their land, the popularization of trade, a monetary economy, and the introduction of local county and state administrative structures.

Of course, these transformations were long lasting and complex. They brought about the disintegration of the structure and organization of villages as local communities. At the same time they contributed to their reintegration based on new principles in the form of a system of intentional associations and organizations, as well as local government.

The direction of changes in the structure and organization of villages and towns as local communities was from spontaneous cooperation to formally organized cooperation, even if many elements of spontaneous solidarity remained in such structures. Communality as a pattern and model of action still exists, even if it appears in modified or changed forms.

Various specialized unions and associations became the basic elements of this new organizational structure. In rural areas it was volontary economic associations and socioeconomic unions. As early as the end of the XIXth century there developed in the Polish territories small loan and savings banks, cooperative creameries, farmers’ clubs, village youth associations, clubs of village housewives, etc.

Similarly in the cities the socioeconomic structure, including craftsmen’s workshops, stores, and counting houses, began, along with various formal associations of economic and sociocultural character. At the fore of these unions were trade guilds and crafts. Subsequently, in the course of social development, came joint stock companies, unions of entrepreneurs, and associations of tradesmen and craftsmen. Apart from their economic activity they also played a role in such domains as professional training, sociocultural and social life. A role in integrating the population of villages and cities was played also by parishes, and in their frame various religious sodalities often with also non-religious activities.

The fullest expression of communality in shaping local communities was the development of local governments on the Polish territories in the XIXth century in the form of county and municipal administration. This development culminated in the period between the first and second World War.

After World War II the policy of the socialist state interrupted the processes of reintegration of local communities in Poland. A centralized, one party administration system was introduced, reaching the lowest levels of the social organizational structures. All social organizations, associations, and socioeconomic unions were cancelled or merged, of course from above. New leaders for these organizations were imposed by the upper levels of the Communist Party. In the course of time several bureaucratized socioeconomic organizations were consolidated in the country as well as in the cities. Similarily, the idea of local self-governments was dismantled. Counties, whether municipal or rural, were not self-governing communities, but the lowest units of the hierarchically constructed state administration, ruled by the members of one party.

The socioeconomic and political revolution going on in Poland must face the need to reconstruct local self-governing communities in villages, counties, and cities -- communities based on the model of communal, not collectivistic action.

Religious life in Poland was characterized, in the past as well as now, by a rich variety of social forms. If highly developed countries are marked by a certain individualization of religious life, in Polish society, even with the atrophy of some communal forms of religious experiences, many traditional forms of religiosity still retain their vigor. Also new forms of socially experiencing union with God have emerged.

First of all, religious life goes on in families, where parents shape the attitudes of their children. Sociological research shows that the family plays a decisive role in shaping and transmitting religious commitment and faith to the younger generation. Many authors stress that continuity of religious beliefs and practices between generation prevails. So that we can speak of "inheriting" religiosity.

This, however, is not entirely true, for some sorts of family practices or rites -- such as praying together in the morning and in the evening, common praying of the rosary or singing the "godzinki" (a set of Marial hymns based on the liturgy of hours) -- vanish or are in crisis. But various new forms of religiosity develop and some ancient religious family customs persist, such as whole families going together to the church, common reading of religious writings and scriptures, observing church feasts (in spite of the fact that they are not legal holidays). The communal trait of religious life in families does not vanish.

Poles are still characterized by the social character of basic religious practices, such as masses, celebration of Christmas, Easter, Marian feasts, and participation in spiritual retreats, days of prayer, missions, etc. The main factor here is not the number of people who participate, but readiness or inclination to pray together with others, in groups or crowds, common prayers and singing of religious songs, experiencing an aura of religious exaltation, and their sense of solidarity with their fellow believers. This communality of religious life manifests itself in religious practices and the mass participation of believers in processions held during major feasts, above all the processions on Corpus Christi. The development of communal forms of religiosity was favored by the pastoral activity of the Catholic Church in Poland, which in the years 1960-1980 developed a mass pastoral action on the parish, diocesan, and national level, and subsequently created special forms of pastoral care for farmers, factory workers, health service workers, etc.

Expressions of the communality of religious life are the various movements aimed at the deepening or renewal of the religious life recently formed in Poland. An essential trait of these movements is their base in small communities.

Apart from the most widely known and popularized informal groups, there exist and function in Poland also various movements of renewal of religious life whose range is more modest or that are only emergent, such as the "Solidarity of Families" movement, the movement for defense of the life of the unborn, the movement for the propagation of sobriety, etc. All arise "from below", from the ranks of believers, and are characterized by a communality of action.

New customs appear in connection with religious events. One of them is a family reunion on the occasion of the child’s First Holy Communion. Godparents come, often from distant places, to participate in the event. There is a revival of such customs as consecrating organizational banners, celebrating patriotic masses, anniversaries and various jubilees or meetings preceeded by participation in an inaugural Mass.

Characteristic of all these religious practices, rites, and customs is their social and communal character.

Communality in the sphere of political life, that is, in the functioning of the state and its organizations, manifests itself in many institutions which at the moment of their foundation were not known in other European countries. In Poland relatively early a system of parliamentary monarchy was formed in which through their deputies consisting of magnates, nobility, and clergy the electorate participated in various decisions. The parliament was called Seym. Some seeds of this institution appeared as early as the Piast dynasty, that is, in the period of the patrimonial state. In the middle of the XVth century the Seym was already a permanent institution, and in 1493 the Radom Seym passed the constitution Nihil novi. The constitution contained regulations limiting royal power, namely, it forbad the king to introduce new taxes without the Seym’s consent and interdicted the restriction of existing civil liberties and issuance of decrees concerning public law without the consent of the parliament. In the course of history the competencies of the Seym expanded until it became the highest legislative body in the state.

The Seym was formed as a collective body and included the royal council. It was transformed later into the so-called senate, consisting of dukes, magnates, the highest royal officials, and a chamber of deputies, representing the nobility. The debates of the Seym were presided over by the king. Since the XVth century general assemblies of the Seym have been held in which decisions concerning the most important affairs of the state were made. The form of the Seym, as well as its competencies and the participation by deputies of social strata of that time (except peasants and the bourgeoisie) expressed the principle of communality in the political system of the state. This contrasted with the unlimited or even absolute monarchic power in many European countries at that time.

Communality appeared also at lower levels of the political life of the country. Since the XIVth century assemblies of regional nobility were held in Poland, constituting an institution of self-government. During these assemblies, called "little Seyms" (sejmiki) decisions were made concerning affairs of the particular region. Local (county) assemblies from the end of the XVth century elected deputies to the parliamentary chamber of deputies. Also general local assemblies of elected noble deputies and senators were convoked in order to discuss important matters and to prepare drafts of resolutions for the coming session of the Seym. A noblemen’s democracy was very well developed enabling the nobility actively to participate in the political life of the country. In the course of time this democracy broadened excesively, paralyzing the functioning of the state and leading to abuses of the rights of nobles. Nevertheless, in no other European country in the XVIIth and the XVIIIth century was royal power as restricted as in Poland.

This state of affairs manifested itself through the institution of liberum veto, demanding that decisions made in the Seym be made unanimously, and causing a rupture of the assembly and cancellation of previously passed decrees upon protest by even one deputy. The rule of unanimity was in force in Poland in the XVIIth and the XVIIIth century and was cancelled only upon the Four Years’ Diet in 1791, which undertook a general reconstruction and change of the political system of the state. Liberum veto was used and abused by the three neighboring countries: Russia, Austria, and Prussia, aiming in the period of electoral kings to take control of Poland, seizing Polish territories and depriving Poles of their own independent state.

From the historical and realistic point of view the institution of liberum veto is considered one of the internal reasons of anarchy and lawlessness among the nobility, and in consequence of the loss of independence of the Polish nation. From the theoretical and idealistic standpoint, however, it may be described as an understanding of "communality" and common decision making in which the will of individuals could not be violated, especially because the opinion of representatives of particular lands or parts of the country was at stake.

Another example of communality as a pattern and model of common decision making in political life is the institution of free election in Poland from 1572 till the fall of the Polish state in 1795. After the childless death of the last patrimonial monarch and the expiration of the Jagiellonian dynasty the Polish Seym elected the king from a circle of foreign and Polish claimants to the Polish throne. In this way the citizenry, even if represented only by magnates and nobility, as well as high state functionaries, elected their king by themselves. The institution of choosing the king by means of a free election persisted in Poland for two centuries. It existed nowhere else in the world in this form. It opened for the neigboring states the possibility of interfering with internal Polish affairs and caused conflicts, seditions, and struggles between noble fractions. Yet in its design it was a democratic institution transferring the power to decide about an affair of such great political weight as the election of the king to the whole electorate of that time.

From the perspective of over one thousand years of history of the Polish nation it is clearly apparent that communality of action and the principle of common decision making appears over and over again as one of the values and features typical for Poles. This communality was combined at the same time with preserving the civil liberty of individuals. But then came the times of the XVIIth and the XVIIIth century when freedom degenerated more and more with every passing decade into the "gold freedom" and licence of Polish magnates and nobility. Communality was squandered and wrecked, for it was not the common good and the good of the state, but the interests of magnate’s families or the egoistic interests of the nobility that directed political conduct. Neighboring states made use of this weakened sense of responsibility for the common good and of political morality to induce unrest by means of intrigues. Subsequently they suported internal conflicts and used military force to bring about the fall of the Polish state.

Communality as a value and a pattern of conduct had to be revived through the long years of struggle for independence.