Print
this page
Email
this page Newsletters - Urban Families
Brazil: Salvador
A conversation held in Salvador, Bahia, Brazil between the Reverend Stephen Taylor, USPG Missionary working with the Diocese of Recife and the recently ordained Reverend Bruno Almeida of Bahia (a state in Brazil the size of France):
Stephen: What are the pressures on family life arising from the great population migration of recent decades from the interior of Brazil to the urban centres like Salvador?
Bruno: For the majority of poorer migrants, family life has suffered enormously. All the benefits of living as part of an extended family have been lost. The consequent strains put on the nuclear family are obvious. City life – seeking work, work itself – takes us away from our family: we simply don't eat and live together as we did. Even better-off people who came to the city to study, with the idea of returning to the interior, have been absorbed in the great economic and social movement of the city and taken beyond their original intentions. Whether as a result of disappointment or success, poverty or dignified survival, a new active life-style has come into play, not to mention the distances and amount of time spent on crowded buses on crowded roads. Living these pressures close-up, perhaps we don't even know the full extent of the effects on the traditional experience of family life.
Stephen: Could you suggest what some of those effects might be, for example, in the community where you live in the Salvador suburb of Periperi?
Bruno: The traditional extended family model, of mother at home with the children while the father works, has gone. In a different economic context, both parents will try to work, not forgetting the great number of single-parent families. Survival is all. For the part of society that struggles here, even work – except if you manage to get into the formal sector – doesn't change the precarious nature of our situation. You see, in the informal sector one or both may work, but income is low and there are demands made on that to pay such things as childcare. This might be very little but it helps a neighbour or someone among the many unemployed. For example, my neighbour, Denise, takes care of her daughter's home which includes her little grand-daughter. This means Cristina can work. Nothing unusual in that, except it is not seen as a grandmotherly gesture but as paid work with a proper wage.
Stephen: How would you describe your family's lifestyle?
Bruno: I am much blessed with my wife, Bianca, and 3-year-old son, João. I teach in the informal sector on a part-time basis in four different places. My wife works in a similar way. To work informally means to work without job security, paid leave or health benefits. However our irregular hours mean we get some time – occasionally together – with João. My unpaid church commitments also take up some time each week. I try to control this and limit it to Sunday and a few mid-week moments. Church commitments for an ordained or lay person remain a priority. In this I am not untypical. This is our culture.
Stephen: What are churches doing to support the family confronting such demands?
Bruno: My contention is that frequently the discourse of churches is different from the underlying reality. The real interest of churches is their own survival and the maintenance of members. The neo-Pentecostal churches especially – but not just them – promote services, vigils, and campaigns of prayer, sometimes lasting for weeks, all in favour of the family. This looks good. Effectively though, there is no actual policy for the family. The effect of daily services and activities – ostensibly for the family – is to leave people with less time in their homes together. Compounding the problem, such healthy family pastimes as sport, the beach or the cinema are scorned as sinful.
Stephen: Is a different approach possible?
Bruno: A different approach depends on a different theological view of religion and who we are. Our church, for instance, is a tiny one with just one main service a week in the two centres – the principal church is in a more middle-class neighbourhood. The atmosphere in both is relatively relaxed and children are made welcome as part of the worship. The size of our congregations means it is easier to create closer ties expressed in family lunches on some Sundays. We also encourage people to pray at home. We are not rigid about attendance, as many of the other churches are. This can be easily misunderstood. But our flexibility means we can give space not just to the obvious families under stress – who might need Sunday time together in their homes - but also to the persons who are not members of a family in the usual sense: single people with or without children, the divorced, the isolated, those who don't fit in elsewhere. You see, as a church we must also create family to express the love of God for all. Yes, a different approach is possible; less easy to manage, maybe less structured. We are striving to discover healthier models. Going to church is a symbol of our relationship to God and commitment to family and community life, not something that should burn up our precious time. In this way we might think of our homes as churches. Surely wherever we are, it is the same God that is present, the same love, the same demands, the same peace and joy.
Top
