Categories: uncategorized
Date: 05 December 2005 17:49:50
Ok, for me, this offer is on one hand encouraging and on the other is disturbing.
On the positive side I think that it is great that the church in question is seeking to offer a trip to the cinema for single parents, particularly, to enjoy. It's positive for all the obvious reasons that are apparent with a no strings attached offer for this group of people.
However, I also find it disturbing for three reasons. Firstly it is not acknowledging the fact that there are a huge number of two parent families who suffer financial hardship, who would benefit from this offer, who are excluded.
Secondly, and what I find more unsettling, is that it is setting "single parents" up as "the other" in the way that has happened so often in the past to "drug addicts", "the homeless" and other groups who are identified as having "issues". The fact the church in question appears to be using this as an opportunity to help this group suggests they have labelled them as a group who are somehow lacking.
Also it suggests, despite the "no strings attatched" nature of the offer that they have identified single parents as a specific demographic group to evangelise to. Now relating back to my earlier points this appears to be a case of identifing a group with a need to evangelise to, (because either they have a need or they are seen as an easier group to reach). My problem is not the evangelisation as such, but rather the fact that so often churches seek to evangelise "the other".
Having said that how we get over the problem of identifing single parents as "the other" when increasingly they make up the "us" in churches and recognise their specific needs, but without singling them out and not at the expense of other groups (including two parent families who have issues which need support) I don't know. I suppose if I'm honest like everybody we want it both ways - to have our needs recognised and met, but also to feel fully inclusive as the "us" rather than the "them".