"Nuclear" and "Extended"
Part of our problem comes about because the words we use: 'nuclear' and 'extended'. In many parts of the world the Western/European 'nuclear' family is regarded as significantly backward and our talk of 'extended' family comes across as patronising. Indeed for the majority of people in our world, the family is about a diverse series of close relationships. The family includes many generations and a variety of people who aim to provide one another with childcare, education, social services, employment, community identity and old age care.

This is not 'extended' it is the norm. More than that, it is much closer to a Biblical model of family which is an inclusive series of interdependent relationships. It is through the family that the commands to care for widows, orphans and refugees can be carried out. They are to be in families.

Indeed, there is no such place as a synagogue in the Old Testament; its emergence owes much to a form of centralised welfare provision to support families in their role. Steve Chalke points out that the first complaint in the early church was from the widows, who felt that their needs were not being seen to as they had before. Sad to say, the plight of single people in the western church today has not much improved. Could this be because we have our idea of family all back to front?

Compartmentalisation
The separation of life into compartments needs to be resisted, it is utterly ungodly. Who said that work, family life, play and - that greatest misnomer of all - worship should be each allocated a distinct diary slot? By setting an ideal by the exclusive 'nuclear' family we pander to this and cede yet more ground to the unthinking individualism of the age.

Our current ideas of family owe much to urbanisation, the constraints of Victorian domestic architecture and the relative high cost of housing. It could be that a moralising tendency in the Church has also played its part. Its most uncomfortable for nuclear family idealists to reflect that the lineage of 'the holy family' contained prostitutes, liars and adulterers and it is how the New Testament is introduced to us.

The problems we store up for ourselves by an over-elevation of the nuclear option are becoming ever more clear: This form of family elevates genetic purity to a great height. Thus while we rightly are concerned about childlessness the need for a baby is elevated to a 'right' and we lose sight of the absurdity of pouring thousands of pounds into the ethically dubious waters of IVF when thousands of 'ready made' children in care stare at us through the pages of adoption magazines. The missing neighbours that are a feature of many of our so-called communities, especially in cities, can trace their origins to the cereal packet family who need only one another and who are needed by none other than an occasional grey-haired and eccentric granny. Building blocks of society? Not at this rate!

The need for inclusion
How do we do this interdependent, relational and externally-focused family (sounds like the Trinity)? In some ways its a choice between being exclusive or inclusive - stagnant pond or fresh flowing river. In some ways its about words, in others it is about the Church coming out of retirement and re-discovering its place as a refuge and support structure, not out of just altruism or guilt but rather an understanding that this is truly sustainable. The inclusive approach may expose us to more pain but the possible downsides are significantly outweighed by the pleasure.

Adam is CARE's Head of Communications and has worked in press and PR

email: adam.atkinson@care.org.uk

return to top