The ‘Family’ Quarrel

Every Wednesday we’ll post a message having to do with doctrine and purity. Hope it helps.

The ‘Family’ Quarrel

In the 1993 comedy Mrs. Doubtfire, Robin Williams, disguised as a grandmotherly housekeeper, offers comfort to a child who fears her parent’s divorce means the end of her family:

“There are all sorts of different families, Katie. Some families have one mommy, some families have one daddy, or two families. Some children live with their uncle or aunt. Some live with their grandparents, and some children live with foster parents. Some live in separate homes and neighborhoods in different areas of the country. They may not see each other for days, weeks, months or even years at a time. But if there’s love, dear, those are the ties that bind. And you’ll have a family in your heart for ever.”

That’s a common sentiment, sweet sounding and growing in popularity. But if it’s just love that makes a family, then what are we to do with the Biblical definition of marriage as being monogamous and male/female in form? For that matter, why bother with the institution at all? If love, rather than matrimony, lays the family foundation, then what’s a license got to do with it?

Tensions rise whenever you promote an objective definition instead of a more inclusive, subjective one. To say, “There’s only one way” can seem divisive, whereas the more egalitarian “Whatever seems right to you is OK” approach gets the ‘nice’ award. In polite conversation, it’s natural to favor subjectivity, avoiding, when possible, the social discomforts that come when an uncompromising position is taken.

But the more crucial the topic, the clearer the mandate for defending objective, exclusive truth.  Here the arguments over the definition of family are much like modern debates over an exclusive versus inclusive concept of God. “I’m not religious; I’m spiritual”, many affirm today, claiming there are multiple paths to God, and many ways to conceptualize Him/Her/It. On this point the Christian can hardly agree, remembering that Jesus Himself said “No one comes to the Father but by Me.” (John 14:6), so believers now face the challenge of promoting an objective, specific definition of God and salvation in a time when subjectivity regarding both is in vogue.

A similar challenge is posed when revisions of the family are called for. When “love makes a family” is argued, we can hardly agree, remembering the precision with which the family is defined in scripture, leaving us with the challenge of promoting an objective, specific definition of marriage and family. Social tensions notwithstanding, this is a topic on which we can ill afford being coy. The ramifications for child rearing and cultural stability are many; the stakes enormous. A mutually agreed upon concept of family determines our nation’s approach to same sex marriage, polygamy, couples living together apart from wedlock, transexualism, adoption, custody of children and divorce. In short, the ‘family’ quarrel – the cultural debate over how it’s defined and preserved – is no small matter, requiring a clear and rational Christian response.

The family was conceived by the Creator in response to His creation’s needs and as an earthly, tangible representation of His nature. Its members, when combined, provide a mosaic in which the observer notes elements male and female, gentle and authoritarian, innocent, knowing, and inexpressibly creative. God is both honored and represented when family ties are in place.

And when definition of the family is understood and lived out by us, it can then be promoted with integrity to a world grappling with questions of intimacy, emotional need and the complexities of human sexuality. The answers we provide will no doubt raise hackles – just consider what happens whenever a public figure confesses to a traditional understanding of marriage and family! But they’ll raise awareness as well, and can become a vehicle through which people hungry for love and security can find answers. Episcopal Bishop Willam Frey alluded to this when he recalled the early church’s impact on Roman/Greek society, an impact made in part by their understanding and promotion of family values:

“One of the most attractive features of the early Christian communities . . . was their radical sexual ethic and their deep commitment to family values. These things . . . drew many people to them who were disillusioned by the promiscuous excesses of what proved to be a declining culture. Wouldn’t it be wonderful for our Church to find such countercultural courage today?”

Comments

Add Comment