Source: Stewart, James. Calculus: Early Transcendentals (6 edn 2007).
[p. 50 Top:] To understand how the expression for a function relates to its graph, it’s helpful to graph a family of functions, that is, a collection of functions whose equations are related. In the next example we graph members of a family of cubic polynomials.
[p. 391 Middle:] You should distinguish carefully between definite and indefinite integrals. A definite integral $\int^b_a f(x) \,dx$ is a number, whereas an indefinite integral $\int f(x) \,dx$ is a function (or family [format mine] of functions).
Of functions: how does 'family' differ from 'set'?
Why did James Stewart write 'family' instead of 'set'?
I read this that feels too advanced for univariate calculus.
The expression a set of functions means a collection of functions, grouped together by some basic common property. For example, $$ L^2[0,1] = \left\{ f:[0,1] \to \mathbb{R} \left| \int_0^1 f(x)^2 dx < \infty\right.\right\}. $$ The relationship feature is common for all functions in the class, but not strong enough to call it a family.
A family of functions typically suggest a very strong relationship, in structure, or in form, perhaps differing by values of a couple of parameters. For example, a set of solutions to $y'(t) = y(t)$ is a family of functions $$y(t) = Ce^t,$$ a much stronger relationship than the one above.
Your example from Stewart is a classic form of this usage. The expression $\int f(x) dx$ represents a family of functions $\mathcal{F} = \{F(x) + c\}$, different by the constant factor $c$ only, having the property that if $\phi \in \mathcal{F}$ then $\phi'(x) = f(x)$.