Relationships in the new media age

How is facebook changing your relationships?

How has the internet changed you? If you think it hasn't, you're either reading this post printed out and handed to you by a friend, or you're just not thinking, which means you're in danger of being changed for the worse.

As we use new media and technologies, they don't just make things quicker or easier; they change how we do things, and thus shape who we are and how we live. They shape the nature of relationships, of communication, of community.

How are your friendships different to your parents' friendships? How are your friendships different now to pre-facebook? If you publically post on someone's wall rather than writing a letter, what difference does it make to your relationship?

So how then should we reflect on and engage with these things as church? Neil Powell of City Evangelical, Birmingham, gave a seminar on this for Avenue Community Church in Leicester - and thanks to him and to them, the recording's available. But this isn't just one to idle away a half hour from curiosity: this is one to gather a group of friends to listen to, discuss, and help each other apply. Relationships in the New Media Age.

Quote of the day: battling for the unborn (again)

John Piper brings an article to our attention on why the pro-life battle isn't being won by appeal to humanity. It's concise, powerful, and true. He concludes:

[A] “case against sexual libertinism” is good, but by itself powerless. “Cases” don’t affect hormones and passions very much. But there is a power to “put to death the deeds of the body” (Romans 8:13). His name is the Holy Spirit. And he moves through faith by making Jesus Christ the supreme treasure of life - including sexual life.

So, at bottom, the battle for the life of the unborn is the same as the battle for the life of the un-born-again.

The Pope's Catholic: shock & offence

I was about to break the startling news that the current Pope's a Catholic, when I ceded the computer to my mother. Returning to the world wide web of wonderment one book later, I see that I've been beaten to it by him who baptised me, over at Ref21. (Those canny men have already pointed out several times that the Pope's a Catholic. So perceptive, they're worth reading.) It seems that Ratzinger remarked that to save the rainforest from destruction is important, but as important is to save mankind from self-destruction, one example he gave as blurring gender distinctions, and homosexual practice. 'Twould be better still if he didn't blur distinctions in how we're right before God (interesting recent sermon - notes here and here. Now that would help save mankind from God-destruction.

Quote of the Day: stating the obvious

Today's prize for stating the obvious goes to... "relationships experts" at Heriot Watt University, who have announced [cue drum roll, trumpet fanfare, and suspended expiration] that

"Rom-coms ... [promote] unrealistic expectations when it comes to love."

Well, knock me down with a feather. Humble freshers who've attended a Pure course, or for that matter, read Genesis 3, could've told them that much.

Pwe-mawiage

Some Christian students earlier this week were sharing that they were concerned about their Christian friends going out with non-Christians. One said her friend was justifying it because 'she spoke of Jesus to him the whole time'.

My principle concern with this is not that they're going out with non-Christians. That is the symptom. They think, "I won't drift: I'm strong in my faith." But that's still not the ultimate concern (though it probably will happen): that's a symptom. The principle concern is that they are treasuring being in a relationship, or this relationship, or this man, more than they treasure Christ. That is my main concern. That is the root issue.

Why do I say that? Surely knowing God's love means that we overflow with more love for others, indiscriminately, as his? This is true. But if we treasure Christ supremely we will not be joined to one who considers him a liar ("a good man"), a fraud ("a revolutionary") or a lunatic ("sincerely misguided"). If we consider that Jesus is Lord, we will not become one with one who considers themselves to be lord. If we are a new creature in Christ, with the Spirit of life dwelling in us, we will not unite with a stinking corpse. If we are reconciled to God in Christ, we will not join with one who's a slave to the enemy. So I say, my principle concern is that they treasure the relationship or the man over Christ, who is infinitely precious and gloriously sufficient.

So the problem is idolatry: putting a right desire (that for relationship, marriage, etc) in the controlling place of the heart, where only Christ should reign.

So how to respond? To merely say, "But you shouldn't go out with a non-Christian: you'll drift" falls far short of addressing the problem. The heart issue is idolatry, and it's probably exposed like this: how do they justify going out with said non-Christian? 90% of the time, the answer will somehow express that "It'll work out". The relationship will be a success. "We love each other; he respects my faith." In other words, their ultimate aim is a sucessful middle-class marriage. That's the idol. Since when did God tell us his plan for us was a happy middle-class marriage??

Another response which may come is this, "I go on to him all the time about Jesus: and I did say I wouldn't go out with him unless he comes to church with me, and he does." But it doesn't matter tuppence if the girl goes on to him incessantly about Christ with her words: meanwhile, she is proclaiming with every inch of her being that he / the relationship is more important than Christ. More precious. More desirable. More fulfilling. Supreme. He doesn't hear "Jesus is Lord" but "You are Lord - and Jesus is a nice optional extra."

So when a friend is going out with a non-Christian, or considering it, why not study the person and work of Christ for a while with your friend? Colossians, perhaps? Do some demolition work on the idols of the heart, and pray that the Holy Spirit, through His word, will build a proper altar in place of the idol-rubble: that of Christ and his finished work. Not going out with non-Christian won't do much good. Being filled with covenant love for Christ in response to his initiated love will change everything. And while you look together at God's word, don't despair for your friend but pray with this hope: a right passion has got in the wrong place (the controlling place) - but the Holy Spirit yearns jealously for Christ's Lordship to be restored there, and therefore will give more grace. (James 4)

Mawwiage

"Mawage. Mawage is wot bwings us togeder tooday."

I was at the wedding of one of the Wolverhampton CU members today, which was lovely. Pastor Steve Uppal of All Nations spoke better than the above. One thing he said caught my attention: "At marriage we give up our right to behave as individuals." Now that must be good advice at a wedding. But it got me thinking: surely the right to behave as individuals is one we don't really have? In the church, we belong to each other as we belong together in Christ. Western individualism and individualistic rights are not only surrendered when joining to another by choice in marriage, but are surrended when joined as the Bride of Christ. We join God's people. We're in God's family. Unlike in most Western marriages, we don't choose those with whom we're joining: but we behave with them not on individual rights but on serving as Christ served. On Philippians 2.