Chapter 14 THE GOSPEL FOR THE CITY

我已经尽我所能，竭力论证了这样一个观点：在21世纪，城市应当成为基督徒生活与使命的首要关注点之一。现在，我想更进一步。这几章关于“城市异象”的内容，或许会让你觉得我主张所有基督徒都应搬到城市中去服事。为了说明清楚，我要说，这并不是我的意思。我相信，凡有人居住的地方，就应该有基督徒和教会。从某种意义上说，没有“渺小”的地方或人。¹神喜爱使用那些看似不重要的人（哥林多前书1:26-31）和不被看好的地方（约翰福音1:46）来成就祂的工作。耶稣并非出身于罗马，甚至也不是耶路撒冷，而是出生在伯利恒，长大在拿撒勒——或许就是为了表明这个道理。如今我们被告知，世界上大约有50%的人口居住在城市里——但这也意味着，还有一半人口并不住在城市。因此，我们绝不能轻看或忽略对那无数乡镇和村庄的福音事工。而且，在小镇上的事奉或许无法改变一个国家，但它肯定可以对某一地区产生深远影响。²

不过，也许我们可以通过一个思想实验来看得更清楚。假设你负责在两个不同的镇上建立新教会：一个镇有100名居民，另一个镇则有10,000名居民。同时，你手上只有四位植堂者。你会怎么安排？无论你的哲学理念如何，我很怀疑有人会认为应当平均分配，每个镇各派两位植堂者，仅仅因为“每个地方在事工上同样重要”。将两位牧者派往一个仅有百人居住的小镇，这在对神所托付的人力资源的管理上，显然不是明智之举。然而，在今天非城市地区的教会数量往往超过城市的现实下，在城市对人类生活影响日益扩大的大背景下，我们理应更加重视城市事工。这，才是对神所赐资源的好管家之道。

因此，我并不是在说所有基督徒都应收拾行囊，搬到城市中去生活和服事。我真正想表达的是：今天世界上的城市，在教会的服事上是严重供应不足的。这是因为，总体而言，世界各地的人口涌入城市的速度，远远快于教会进入城市的速度。而我正竭力运用一切可以使用的资源——圣经的、社会学的、宣教学的、教会性的、修辞上的——来帮助教会（尤其是在美国的教会）重新定位，来面对这个巨大的缺口。

不过，对城市的呼召并不止步于此。世界上每一个角落，如今都比十年前、二十年前更加城市化。无论你身处何地，无论你在哪儿工作和服事，城市都在向你走来。从这个意义上说，每一间教会都必须成为其所处城市的教会——无论那是大都会、大学城，还是一个乡村小镇。因此，我相信，当你愿意让你自己和你的事工，有意识地受城市生活和文化的现实与模式所塑造时，你必将从中受益。要实现这一点，我们首先要思考城市的动态如何影响我们的生活，然后再进一步探讨那些拥有“城市异象”的教会，将如何回应这些城市动态来开展事工。

HOW THE CITY WORKS ON US

很多人认为，在“距离已死”的时代，城市的重要性理应会下降，但事实并非如此。人们曾以为，如果可以通过互联网学习，那还需要为大城市昂贵的房价买单吗？但现实是，真正的学习、沟通与社区生活远比我们愿意承认的复杂。大量研究表明，面对面的接触与学习是任何其他形式都无法完全取代的。

因此，研究指出，那些位于本行业“创新活动”地理中心附近的公司，其生产力明显更高。为什么？因为靠近同行可以带来无数次互动，许多是非正式的，它们能更快地将新手变成专家，也促使专家之间激发出新的洞见。经济学家爱德华·格雷泽指出：“密集工作环境的价值很大程度上来自于意外的邂逅和观察身边人的日常活动。视频会议永远无法让一个有潜力的年轻人通过观察一位成功导师的日常工作来学习。”3 其他研究也显示，在专利申请中，有很高比例引用了同一大都市区域内的旧专利，说明“即使在信息科技的时代，创意往往仍具有地理集中性。”⁴

城市理论家称之为“聚集效应”（agglomeration）。聚集效应指的是由于物理上的接近而产生的经济和社会效益。因此，洛杉矶和多伦多的电影产量远高于亚特兰大并不令人惊讶，因为前两者聚集了更多熟练的从业人员——编剧、导演、演员、技术人员等，他们让电影得以诞生。金融创新大多出自曼哈顿，技术革新多出自硅谷，也不令人意外。为什么？因为聚集效应。当成千上万从事同一领域的人聚集在一起，自然就会诞生新思想和新企业。但聚集效应带来的益处不止于与同行接近；靠近与你不同却互补的人群，也能带来巨大的益处。

一个很好的例子是艺术界。“艺术运动通常具有高度的地域性”，甚至比其他领域更甚。城市研究者伊丽莎白·柯里德采访了纽约的文化创作者（时尚设计师、音乐家、艺术家）和“守门人”（画廊主、策展人、编辑），以及这些人常去的俱乐部和场所的老板、媒体人、学者、资助艺术的基金会负责人，以及富裕的艺术赞助人。艺术“发生”在这些不同艺术生态系统参与者之间的复杂互动中——往往不是在办公室会议里，而是在社交聚会或偶然邂逅中。柯里德发现，文化经济依赖于“艺术与文化创作者的密集聚集”，它是一个“集中式的生产系统”。当这些不同角色的人群地理上相邻时，就会产生成千上万次富有创造力的面对面互动，这是其他情况下无法实现的。正如瑞安·阿文特所说：“城市就像一群好朋友：你在做什么并不重要，重要的是你们在一起做。”

第一，城市将你与许多‘与你相似’的人联系起来。 城市的挑战与机会吸引了最多才、最有抱负、最不安分的人。无论你是谁，在城市里你都会遇到比你更有才华、更成熟的人。由于你身处一群与你相似却极其优秀的同行中，你会不断受到激励，拼尽全力做到最好。城市之所以独特，是因为它聚集并激发了人力资源，推动文化发展，这在其他任何生活形态中都难以实现。然而，罪会扭曲这一优势，使这种文化建构的强度变成骄傲、嫉妒与过劳的温床。这正是罪的作为——对美好事物的寄生性扭曲。我们需要福音，来抵挡这种黑暗面。

面对面

密歇根大学的两位研究人员做了一个实验，让每组6名学生一起玩一个团队游戏。有些小组在游戏前可以面对面交流10分钟策略，而另一些小组则只能通过电子方式交流30分钟。结果发现，电子互动的小组表现明显较差。这项及其他实验让我们看到：“面对面的接触比任何其他形式的互动都更能建立信任、慷慨与合作精神。”¹¹事实上，常识也告诉我们，我们会被身边人的表现所激励，努力达到他们的水平。

第二，城市将你与许多‘与你不同’的人联系起来。 城市吸引各种亚文化群体和边缘群体，他们彼此扶持。城市对弱势者天生具有怜悯，为单身者、穷人、移民、少数族裔等提供了相对安全的栖身之地。由于你无法回避这种多样性，你会不断被挑战于自己的观念与信仰。你将面对充满创意的新思想与实践方式，迫使你要么放弃旧有的方式和信仰，要么变得比从前更了解它们、更坚定持守它们。同样，罪会扭曲城市“多元文化建构”的特质，使其成为侵蚀我们信仰与世界观的地方。我们再次需要福音，来抵挡这一黑暗面。

面对挑战，基督徒该如何回应？我们必须以福音来回应。那么，福音到底如何帮助我们以喜乐而非恐惧面对这些挑战？很明显，我们必须将福音带入城市，也要在城市中聆听福音。但我们也必须意识到，城市本身也会把福音带给我们。城市会挑战我们，从新的角度体会福音的大能。我们会遇到一些人，看起来在灵性和道德上都“毫无希望”。我们可能会想：“那种人绝不可能信耶稣。”但这样的想法本身就暴露了我们的问题。如果救恩真的是出于恩典，而不是凭德行和功劳，那我们凭什么觉得某些人比我们更难得救？某人的归信为什么会比我们自己的更大奇迹？

在城市中，我们也会遇到许多信仰不同或没有信仰的人，他们比我们更智慧、更仁慈、更有思想深度。即使我们在恩典中成长了，许多基督徒依然比不少非基督徒更软弱。当这让你惊讶时，不妨好好思想：如果恩典的福音是真的，那我们为何会以为基督徒一定比非基督徒“更好”？这些“普通恩典”的活例会让我们看见，尽管我们在理智上明白“因信称义”的教义，但在实践上，我们仍然假设救恩是靠道德和行为。

在救赎主教会（Redeemer）的早期事工中，我们意识到，把城市当作怜悯对象、把自己当作“救世主”的心态是错误的。我们必须谦卑地向城市及其人民学习，尊重他们。我们与他们的关系必须是有意识的“互相成全”。我们要愿意看见神在他们生命中的“普通恩典”。我们必须承认，我们也需要他们，来完善我们对神和祂恩典的认识，正如他们也需要我们一样。

我相信，许多西方的基督徒之所以远离城市，是因为城市充满了“他者”。因为城市充满了与我们截然不同的人群，许多基督徒会感到迷失。内心深处，我们可能不喜欢这些人，或不觉得与他们在一起有安全感。但看看我们多容易忘记福音！福音告诉我们，有一位神来住在我们中间，成为我们的样式，并爱我们至死，尽管我们与祂完全不同。城市使我们谦卑，让我们看见自己其实并没有真正活出福音的故事与样式。

唯有福音能赐我们谦卑（“我需要向城市学习”）、自信（“我可以为城市带来贡献”）和勇气（“我不需要惧怕城市”），使我们能在城市中开展有果效、荣耀神、祝福他人的事工。最终我们会发现，为了我们自身属灵生命持续的成长和健康，我们可能比城市需要我们更需要城市。

基督徒该如何看待城市？

如果城市能够让我们变得更好，那我们又该如何回报城市呢？

1. 基督徒应当培养对城市的欣赏之情。 约拿虽然顺从神前往尼尼微城，但他并不爱那座城市。同样地，许多基督徒可能出于对神的责任感来到城市，却对城市的拥挤和多样性感到强烈反感。但若要在城市中有效地服事，就必须欣赏这座城市，应当热爱城市生活，并从中获得活力。为什么这是如此关键呢？

首先，很多生活在城市中的人确实喜欢城市生活，如果你试图邀请他们进入教会，而他们感受到你对城市的负面态度，那就会成为他们接纳福音的一道障碍。其次，如果一个教会主要由不喜欢城市生活的人组成，那么他们也不会久留。你的教会将面临极高的人口流动率（仿佛城市的人员流动问题还不够严重一样！）。

传讲和教导要建立一种积极看待城市的教会文化，就必须持续回应对城市生活的常见质疑，比如“城市生活不健康”、“太昂贵”、“不适合养育孩子”等等。其中还有两个尤为常见的反对意见。其一是：“乡村纯朴，城市堕落。”基督徒应当识别出这种想法背后的错误神学（和错误的历史观）。19世纪和20世纪初的自由人文主义认为人性本善，问题来自错误的社会化，也就是说，环境让人变得暴力和反社会。他们认为城市社会教会我们自私和暴力。然而，圣经教导我们城市不过是人心的放大镜，它揭示出我们内心原本就存在的东西。上一章我们已经探讨过城市在文化塑造方面的优势以及其属灵危险，但我们必须记得，人类将罪带入城市，不是城市本身导致罪恶。

另一个常见的看法是：“乡村令人振奋，而信仰在城市中枯萎。”诚然，乡村可以激发灵感，但说城市环境更难发现并成长信仰，这是错误的。正如我们前面提到的，许多来自文化压制基督教的地区的人，第一次听见福音往往是在拥有“思想自由市场”的大城市里。数百万原本几乎无法接触福音的人，在移居城市后变得触手可及。同时，许多在基督教传统中长大的名义信徒来到城市后，面临新的挑战，最终获得真实、稳固的信仰。我在救赎主教会的服事中，已经无数次见证这样的转变。实际上，城市是一个属灵的热土，有人在此失去信仰，也有人在此找到信仰——这是在更为单一、非多元的环境中难以发生的。

有时候，人们把城市与乡村的对比描绘得更加极端。我的同事哈维·康（Harvie Conn）告诉我，有人曾对他说：“上帝创造了乡村，人建造了郊区，而魔鬼造了城市。”这背后的神学观实在令人质疑。神学上，把乡村视为更蒙神喜悦的地方是站不住脚的。一位城市宣教士比尔·克里斯平（Bill Krispin）曾对我说：“乡村是植物多于人的地方，城市是人多于植物的地方。而神比起植物，更爱人，所以祂更爱城市。”我认为这是有力的神学逻辑。创造的高峰，是神按着自己的形象造人（创1:26-27）。因此，充满人的城市，也就充满了神眼中最美的景象。正如我们之前所说，城市每平方英寸所体现的“神的形象”比其他地方都多，因此我们绝不能理想化乡村，认为它比城市更属灵。即便像温德尔·贝里（Wendell Berry）那样推崇乡村生活的人，也描绘出一种人类社群形式，是完全可以在城市中实现的。

温德尔·贝里与“农耕心态”

许多人将散文家温德尔·贝里视为当代“农耕派”代表人物之一，他为乡村生活胜过城市生活提出了有力的论据。然而，尽管贝里确实赞扬了农场和小镇的生活，他所谓的“农耕心态”，其实是一种重视本地化的价值观：

“农耕心态是地方性的……它必须对当地的植物、动物和土壤有亲密的了解；必须熟悉当地的可能性与不可能、机会与危险；它依赖于、并坚持于了解非常具体的本地历史和人物传记。”

他继续指出“农耕心态”包括：（1）不将工作视为赚钱工具，而是人类繁荣的基础；（2）重视那些具体的、持久的、有用的劳动；（3）谦卑、满足，对增长和财富没有强烈的渴望；（4）对一个地方和其人群终身投入，在一个固定的社群中完成工作、娱乐、家庭生活，并建立长久而深厚的关系网络。贝里将此与“工业心态”对比，后者体现为骄傲、缺乏对自然和限制的敬畏，并表现在剥削与贪婪上。

这意味着，即便是住在城市里的人，也完全可以拥有“农耕心态”。对比珍·雅各布斯（Jane Jacobs）的开创性著作《美国大城市的生与死》和贝里的思想，会非常有启发。雅各布斯和贝里一样，强调邻里和本地经济的重要性——人们彼此认识、经常互动、将自己的利益视为邻居的利益。

珍·雅各布斯指出，虽然城市可能比乡村更大、更复杂，但良好的城市生活仍然可以建立在本地社群的基础上。她推崇街区中的日常交往、小型商家与街头文化，因为它们促成了邻里关系、互信与责任感。实际上，她描述的正是贝里所称的“农耕心态”在城市中的体现。换句话说，一种注重人际关系、地方归属感和长期投入的生活方式，并不是乡村的专利。

基督徒不仅可以在城市中活出这种“农耕心态”，更应该带头示范这种生活方式。一个属灵成熟的城市教会，不应只是让人来“消费”宗教服务，而是培育出一群长久居住、关心邻舍、深耕社群的信徒。他们在同一个街区扎根、在城市中建立家庭、培育下一代，并在各种领域中为主作盐作光。他们不是把城市当作短暂的停靠站，而是视之为神所托付的使命田。

如果你的教会或你个人不在大都市地区，那么该如何践行这一价值观呢？我认为最好的策略是将城市事工纳入你的全球宣教计划中。这可能意味着支持那些在城市中服事的宣教士；但更有效的策略是支持在全球城市中进行植堂的事工。另一个颇具前景的趋势是建立跨整个城市范围的教会与其他机构的合作关系，共同支持在城市中全面传扬福音的工作。

2. 基督徒应当在他们所居住的地方成为一个充满活力的逆文化(Counterculture)群体。 然而，仅仅作为个人生活在城市中是不够的，基督徒必须以某种特定的群体形式生活。在圣经中关于两座城市的故事里，人所建的城是建立在自我荣耀的原则之上（创世记11:1-4），而“我们神的城……在高处华美，是全地的喜乐”（诗篇48:1-2）。换句话说，神所期望的城市社会是建立在服侍而非自私之上，其目的在于将文化的丰富带来的喜乐传播到全世界。

有人可能会问：“基督徒不能在郊区成为另一个城市吗？”当然可以！这正是我们作为基督徒的普遍呼召之一。然而，属世之城会放大这个“另一个城市”及其独特事工的影响力。

在种族单一的地方，更难以用实际的方式展现福音是如何独特地打破种族隔阂的（参以弗所书2:11-22）。在很少有艺术家居住的地方，也更难以展现福音对艺术的独特影响。在经济单一、远离世上广泛存在的人类贫困的地方，基督徒更难实际地意识到自己在花多少钱在自己身上。

在郊区或乡镇中可能实现的事，在城市中变得更加清晰突出。城市以鲜明的细节展现了那由福音结出的独特群体生活的样貌。

3. 基督徒应当是一个全心致力于整座城市福祉的群体。 基督徒不能仅仅建立一种“对抗”城市价值观的文化，我们也必须动员我们信仰与生命中一切资源，牺牲自己，为整座城市，尤其是贫困者的益处而努力。

特别重要的是，基督徒不可被“消费型城市”的思维方式所诱惑——也就是将城市视为成年人的游乐场。城市以令人目不暇接的设施和娱乐方式吸引年轻人，这是郊区或小镇无法比拟的。即便将收入、教育程度、婚姻状况和年龄等因素排除在外，城市居民仍然更有可能去听音乐会、参观博物馆、看电影，或在本地酒吧小酌一杯——这些在城市以外的地区相对少见。除此之外，城市居民相较于乡村居民，更容易对自己的“见多识广”和“潮流感”感到自豪。

基督徒不能因这些动机而来到城市（或至少不能因此而留在城市）。诚然，基督徒可以从城市生活的独特乐趣中获得滋养，但最终，我们住在城市，是为了服事。

基督徒被呼召要在每一个属世的城市中成为另一个城市、在每一个人类文化中活出另一种人类文化——展示性、金钱与权力如何可以被善用而非造成破坏；展示在基督之外无法和睦相处的阶级与种族，如何可以在基督里彼此接纳；展示如何通过艺术、教育、政府与商业等工具带来希望，而非绝望或愤世嫉俗。

用“洗礼的眼光”看待城市

我们既要现实，也要盼望。我们要警醒地看见城市中的堕落与偶像，但也要用“洗礼的眼光”来看待城市的潜力。所谓“洗礼的眼光”，就是一种更新后的想象力，能够看见神如何在城市中动工，也能预见未来的可能性。它让我们不只是看到眼前的混乱与破碎，而是看见神对城市的旨意和城市被更新后的样貌。

例如，当你走过城市的街道，看见满是涂鸦的墙面、忙碌的通勤者、拥挤的地铁、熙熙攘攘的市集、风格迥异的语言与文化时——你会怎么看？是感到厌烦、困扰，还是由衷感到振奋？是看到“问题”和“挑战”，还是看到神精心创造的丰富多样、潜藏的恩典，以及充满福音机遇的土壤？

神爱城市，不仅因为城里住着祂所造的人，更因为祂早已预定有一天，这些城市将不再被罪和偶像玷污，而是成为荣耀祂的圣洁之地。启示录21章告诉我们，那圣城新耶路撒冷“从天而降”，象征着神终极的救赎与更新，是城市的“洗礼”与重生。

回应神的呼召——在城市中定居、扎根、事奉

因此，基督徒对城市的回应不应只是忍受或暂时适应，而是主动拥抱、扎根其中。我们要像耶利米书29章中神对被掳的以色列人所说的那样：“要建造房屋，住在其中；栽种田园，吃其中所产的；要娶妻生儿女……要为所掳去的城求平安，为那城祷告耶和华，因为那城得平安，你们也随着得平安。”

这是一种深刻的委身：不是消极地等待神将我们带离城市，而是积极地在其中生活、建设、祷告、传福音。基督徒不该只是城市的“过客”，而要成为城市的“邻舍”；不只是使用城市资源的人，而是参与塑造城市面貌的人。

以下是你提供的英文内容的中文翻译，语言风格尽量保持清晰自然，适合中文读者理解：

为城市而设的教会的七个特质

要在我们的城市中真实地活出这样的信仰姿态，远比谈论它要困难得多。真正的挑战，是要建立起那些能够有效回应当代城市现实的教会与事工。如今在美国主导福音派差传工作的，大多是白人、非城市背景的信徒。他们既不了解，也往往不喜欢城市生活。

正如我一直所主张的，许多目前通行的事工方式，大多是在城市之外发展出来的，之后又未经深思地被直接“搬进”城市。这种做法实际上在城市居民与福音之间竖起了许多不必要的障碍。因此，当牧者进到城市时，常常会发现传福音变得格外困难；而即便有人信主，门训他们、帮助他们在一个多元、世俗、文化高度交织的城市中生活，也同样困难重重。

就像圣经必须翻译成读者熟悉的语言一样，福音也必须以城市居民能够理解、感受到的方式被体现出来、被传讲。

我认为，真正扎根于城市、尊重并理解城市文化的教会，无论规模大小，通常会展现出以下七个关键特质：

  1. 尊重城市的文化感知（urban sensibility）
  2. 对文化差异有非常敏锐的察觉
  3. 委身邻里与社会公义
  4. 整合信仰与工作
  5. 倾向采用复杂多元的福音传播方式
  6. 既吸引又挑战城市人的讲道
  7. 对艺术与创意的高度认同与投入

我们接下来会更详细地解释这七个特质，有些也会在本书后续章节中进一步探讨。

1. 尊重城市的文化感知

我们很难意识到自己所处文化的“形状”，因为文化对我们来说大多是“看不见”的。正因如此，当人离开自己的社会，进入一个完全不同的文化中时，才会开始发现，许多原本看似“理所当然”的思维和行为，其实只是某个特定文化中的表现方式。

而通常，人们更容易注意到大的文化差异，而忽略那些微妙但关键的小差异。许多基督徒虽然仍在同一个国家甚至同一个地区，但一旦搬进城市生活，往往低估了自己与城市文化之间的差异。他们的言谈举止与城市人的感知格格不入，当有人指出这一点时，他们反而觉得这是在吹毛求疵或故作高雅。

绝大多数美国福音派教会在文化上属于中产阶层。他们偏好私密、安全、一致、温情、空间、秩序与掌控。而城市则充满了讽刺、锐利、多元、喜欢混杂、能够容忍矛盾与混乱的人群。总体而言，城市居民比起舒适与掌控，更重视强烈的体验与便利的接触。他们在沟通上追求内容与形式的精致，却又讨厌过于油滑、宣传式和做作的表达。

能够在这些张力之间取得平衡，并不只是“表演”得好。一个真正能够服事城市的基督徒领袖，必须是从内在属于这文化的人，才能自然地理解与回应这些文化特质。

真正的教会

需要说明的是，以上七个城市型教会的特质，并不取代关于“什么是真正的教会”这一更根本的圣经问题。

按圣经定义，一个真正的教会必须具备以下记号：

而教会的目的，是要通过这些事工来实现以下目标：

所有真正的教会都具备这些标志。然而，一个教会即便具备了这些圣经记号，其在城市中的事工仍可能毫无果效。为什么？因为讲道者虽然忠心地讲解神的话，却可能只对某类听众有用，对城市中的人却显得模糊、无力、甚至令人反感。

这一点在本书的导言以及第三部分“福音语境化”中会有更深入的讨论。

特别是在城市中心区域，生活着大量受过良好教育、口才出众、有创意、表达力强的人。他们不太会接受那种权威式的宣告，而是更欣赏有深度、逻辑清晰的呈现，并希望能够有回应、讨论与交流的空间。

如果教会领袖无法进入这种城市文化，而是在城市里建立起一个“宣教隔离区”（像一座堡垒或保护壳），他们很快就会发现自己无法真正触及、转化或接纳身边的城市居民。

2. 对文化差异的高度敏锐

在城市事工中，真正有效的带领者对身边不同族群的存在格外敏锐。因为城市通常人口密集且多元，文化复杂程度远高于其他环境。这不仅意味着不同种族和社会经济阶层之间的地理距离更近，也意味着其他因素——如族裔、年龄、职业、宗教——共同交织出一张多层次的“亚文化网”。

以纽约市为例，市中心五十岁以上的资深艺术家，与年轻一代的艺术家在文化上有显著差异。纽约的犹太社群庞大且复杂多样。非洲裔美国人、非洲移民与加勒比黑人群体之间，虽然在对白人文化的共同认同上有一致感，但他们在文化习惯上却有明显差异。有些群体之间的张力比其他群体更为明显（例如某些城市中非洲裔美国人与韩裔之间的冲突）。同志群体内部也存在不同声音：一些人希望融入主流文化，另一些则坚持保持距离。亚裔群体中，还会讨论“第一代、1.5代、第二代”等代际差异。

城市中有果效的牧者，首先必须识别这些差异，并避免以为这些差异无关紧要。接着，他们需要以尊重的态度去理解这些族群，并在沟通与事工中智慧地处理差异，尽量避免不必要的冒犯。事实上，城市牧者应当常常让人惊讶于他们对其他文化的了解之深。例如，如果你是个白人男性，你偶尔应该会听到别人说：“我没想到一个白人竟然懂这个。”

那些从文化单一地区搬入城市的人，通常会逐渐意识到，许多他们以为是“常识”的观念与习惯，其实深受自己的种族与阶层所影响。例如，很多英裔美国人并不觉得自己有一种“白人式”的方式来做决策、表达情绪、处理冲突、安排时间或沟通。他们只是认为“这就是大家都认同的正常方式”。但在城市中，人们通常会变得更加敏感，开始意识到这些盲点。为什么？因为他们日常与来自不同背景的朋友、邻居、同事有密切接触，从而熟悉了他们各自的渴望、恐惧、热情与行为模式。他们也亲身经历过同一句话在不同族群或职业群体中可能拥有完全不同的含义。

当然，没有任何教会能够做到“面面俱到”。没有一种文化是“中立的”，也没有一种事工方式是“全族通用”的。城市教会必须在众多文化中做出选择，这就意味着它的实践必然会倾向某些文化的价值观；而其他文化背景的人，会从中感受到某种程度的“距离”或“不自在”。比如，教会一旦决定使用哪种语言讲道、采用哪类音乐敬拜，就等于是为某些人打开了大门，也让另一些人却步。

尽管如此，城市教会始终要面对的挑战，是尽可能让事工向更广泛的文化敞开，尽可能包容多样性。一种做法，是让教会“台前”的领袖团队体现出族群的多样性。当我们看到台上有一个与自己相似的人发言或带领聚会时，会在某种难以言明的层面上感到被接纳。

另一种方法，是认真倾听会众中那些感觉被边缘化的人。他们所提出的批评，往往能帮助教会发现隐藏的盲点，调整方式以接纳更多人。

归根结底，我们必须接受这样一个现实：城市教会常常会收到关于“种族不敏感”的批评。牧者们活在一种持续的张力中——总觉得自己还没有尽可能接纳更多元的族群。但他们甘心乐意地接受这种挑战，并视这些批评为城市事工中不可避免的“代价之一”，更是建立多元文化教会过程中必须承受的一部分。

3. 对邻舍与公义的委身

城市社区极为复杂。即便是经过改造、充满专业人士的“高档社区”，也可能是“二元结构”的：在那些居住于昂贵公寓、子女就读私立学校、积极参与各种社团与俱乐部的富裕居民之外，往往还有一个“隐形的社区”——那里住着贫困家庭、孩子们就读挣扎求存的公立学校、人们依赖政府提供的住房生活。

城市中的牧者需要学会“解读”自己的社区，从而理解其中的社会结构与复杂性。他们几乎痴迷地研究并熟悉本地社区的历史、现状与问题（在城市民族志、城市人口统计和城市规划方面的学术训练，对教会中的平信徒领袖和同工团队也大有助益）。但忠心的教会之所以这样做，并不仅仅是为了“瞄准”特定群体进行布道——尽管福音宣教仍是一个重要目标。教会真正关心的是如何促进社区的整体健康，使之成为更安全、更具人性化、更适合人居住的地方。这正是耶利米书第29章所说“为所居之城求平安”的真实实践。

城市教会会训练信徒在城市中做“邻舍”，而不是单纯的“消费者”。正如我们之前提到，城市吸引年轻专业人士，往往是因为这里像一个“主题乐园”，拥有数不尽的娱乐与文化选择。许多新居民将城市视为一个提升履历、建立人脉、结交有用朋友的跳板。他们计划待上几年，享受一下，然后就离开。换言之，他们是在“使用”这座城市，而不是在这里“做邻舍”——正如耶稣在《路加福音》10:25–37中“好撒玛利亚人”的比喻中所定义的那样。

20世纪中期，简·雅各布斯（Jane Jacobs）出版了城市研究领域的经典之作《美国大城市的死与生》。她最重要的贡献之一，是强调“街道生活”对于城市社会至关重要。她观察到：人行道上的人流、街头的生活气息，以及住宅与商铺的混合布局（这些在当时被郊区规划者和部分城市规划者视为负面现象）对于城市的经济活力、安全、人际关系健康与社会结构稳固都至关重要。她强烈反对20世纪中期那些大规模的城市改造工程，因为这些工程摧毁了原本有生命力的街区和她所推崇的“街道文化”。

雅各布斯写道：

“若把城市社区视为一种自治组织，我看到只有三类社区真正有用：
（1）整个城市；
（2）街道社区（street neighborhoods）；
（3）大型区域社区（districts），在大城市中人口可达十万以上。”

她进一步解释了这三类社区各自的功能，并指出它们之间以复杂的方式相互补充。换句话说，城市居民应当认识自己真正的邻居（街道社区）、熟悉住家周围几个街区（区域社区），但光有这些还不够。如果一个社区只顾自身利益，而与其他社区对立，这种“选区政治”（ward politics）只会带来割裂与破坏。

因此，基督徒与教会必须设法成为整座城市的“好邻舍”，而不仅仅是自己街道上的邻居。如果教会只顾自身的邻里，却忽视整个城市，往往会导致对城市中最贫困人群的漠视。而如果教会只关注整个城市的宏观事工，却忽略自身所在地的需要，那么它最终也可能变成一个“通勤教会”——人来人往，但再也接触不到居住在教会周围的真实人群。

城市教会应该在社区中被认出为一群致力于“邻舍之善”的人——无论这些邻舍是近在咫尺还是远在城的另一端。唯有这样的全人委身，才能带来真正的城市生活质量；而若教会不参与其中，城市很自然地会视它为一个“部落式”的团体——只关心自己的人，只做自己的事。

4. 信仰与工作的整合

传统的福音派教会往往强调个人的虔诚，却很少帮助信徒理解如何在艺术、商业、学术和政府等领域中，持守并实践他们的基督信仰。许多教会不懂得如何在不将信徒“抽离”原有职业的前提下进行门训，反而倾向于邀请他们大量参与教会内部的活动。换句话说，基督徒的门徒生活被理解为主要发生在晚上或周末的教会事务中。

租用场地与邻里关系

城市植堂面临的一个“职业性风险”是：新教会通常需要租用场地聚会，这意味着教会“集体地”仅在租用时间内出现在某个社区中。这往往会导致一方面，邻里根本不知道有教会在此聚会；另一方面，教会成员对“爱邻舍”几乎没有责任感。

因此，对于租用场地的教会来说，“拥有”所在社区的归属感就格外重要。教会领袖应当有意识地“住进”他们的社区，包括参与本地的社区委员会与居民协会的会议，联系地方政府官员与民意代表，去了解如何最有效地服侍社区的实际需要。Redeemer 教会过去在这方面并不擅长，但如今我们已经搬入曼哈顿上西区首个自有的聚会场所，我们正努力在这方面做出改变。

城市居民从事的许多职业——如时尚与媒体、艺术与科技、商业与金融、政治与公共政策——都要求极高的时间与精力投入。这些通常不是“每周四十小时”的工作，而是会占据一个人生活与思想的大部分内容的职业。城市中的基督徒每天都要面对来自职场的伦理与神学挑战。因此，城市教会的讲道与牧养工作，必须帮助信徒在其职业领域中建立信仰网络，并协助他们思考如何面对工作中的神学、伦理与实践问题。

除了这些具体的实践挑战，城市基督徒还需要一种更宽广的异象，去理解基督信仰如何与文化互动与影响文化。正如我们先前所讨论，城市是文化孕育的温床，而生活在这样的环境中的信徒，对于“基督信仰如何在公共生活中表达”有着极大的需要。

关于这一议题的更多探讨，请参阅本书第5部分（文化介入）与第7部分（整合式事工）。

5. 偏向于复杂的福音工作

有两类城市教会即使不积极传福音，也可能实现增长。第一类是族裔／移民教会。虽然许多族裔教会本身具有传福音的意向，但它们其实可以在没有任何信主者加入的情况下成长，因为新移民总是想在城市中寻找与自己同族群的人。于是，这些教会就成了某个族裔或亚文化群体的“非正式社区中心”——只要不断有新移民涌入，他们就能凭借团契关系而不断扩展。

第二类是在西方大城市中心中，那些专门服务某个“福音派移民亚文化”的教会。这些教会通过讲道、音乐、儿童事工等方式，吸引已经是基督徒的人群。在过去的几十年中，在美国南方和中西部以外的城市里，这类教会并不常见，因为几乎没有“寻找教会的基督徒顾客群”存在。然而，在过去十五年的“城市复兴”中，情况发生了变化。如今，越来越多的年轻人成为城市居民，他们来自全国各地，将城市视为理想的居住地。

Redeemer长老教会的经验可以很好地说明这一现象。

Redeemer 教会于 1980 年代末期在曼哈顿成立，那时正值城市衰败的尾声。犯罪率居高不下，人口流失严重，几乎没有基督徒愿意从其他地方搬来纽约市。在教会建立的头几年里，它的成长完全依靠积极、热情而有魅力的传福音。传福音的意识深深植入这个年轻群体之中，在头五年内，数百人从不信或毫无教会背景中归信基督。

到了 1990 年代中期，城市开始复兴，我们注意到有越来越多有基督徒背景的年轻人搬进城市。到十年末，我们发现我们可以（而且确实）通过吸引这些人来大幅增长，同时也帮助他们将基督信仰活出来、服事城市。当然，这是非常好也非常重要的事，但它也可能掩盖教会在传福音方面的懈怠。最终，若教会的增长只是靠吸引信徒而不是转化不信者，就无法真正而深刻地影响这座城市。意识到这一危险后，我们教会重新承诺要重燃传福音的文化氛围。

城市教会不仅要委身于传福音，更要委身于面对城市传福音的复杂性。在城市中，没有哪一种传福音的方法或信息可以“通用于所有人”。例如，在伦敦，一位基督徒牧师无法用完全相同的方式对一位本地苏格兰无神论者和一位来自巴基斯坦的穆斯林传福音——尽管他们可能住在同一条街上，甚至是字面意义上的邻居。

城市传福音需要深入了解各种文化的最大盼望、恐惧、世界观，以及他们对基督教的主要质疑。它需要有创意地使用多种媒介与场景，并且需要巨大的勇气。

6. 既吸引又挑战城市居民的讲道。

也许，对于在城市环境中讲道的人来说，最大的挑战是听众中可能有许多世俗和非信徒。当然，城市教会也可能像其他教会一样变得封闭，但城市生活的一些特性更容易使教会聚会成为“属灵上混合”的场合，有更多非信徒参与。城市中心单身人士比例更高，而单身基督徒邀请单身非信徒朋友参加教会聚会，要比一个基督徒家庭邀请一个完整的非信徒家庭来得容易得多。单身人士可以单方面做决定（不需要与其他人商量），他们通常也花更多时间在家外，更愿意尝试新鲜事物。此外，城市文化并不是“汽车文化”，而是步行文化，因此，人们从街上因好奇心走进教会也并不罕见。最后，城市是人们为“成功”而来的地方，他们往往与大家庭分离，承受着巨大的压力。因此，城市居民常常处于属灵寻求的状态中，渴望人际联系和归属感。

城市讲道人面临的挑战，是要以一种既能造就信徒、又能吸引并向非信徒传福音的方式讲道。关于以福音为导向的敬拜，我们将在第23章进一步讨论。这里先提供一些指导建议：

第一，务必讲述那些把道德劝勉扎根于基督及其救赎工作的讲道（参见第六章《为更新而讲道》的部分）。要展示出，只有当我们正确相信并应用基督的救赎工作时，我们才能正确地生活。通过这样的方式，非信徒每周都能听到福音，同时信徒们的问题和困扰也能被针对性地解决。

第二，非常注意听众的基本前设。不要假设每个听众都信任圣经。因此，当你从圣经提出观点时，最好也引用其他被信任的权威（比如经验科学）来佐证圣经。你可以这样引导：“看，圣经早在几百年前就告诉了我们，而科学现在才验证了它。”这样可以帮助听众建立对圣经的信任，从而让你可以继续讲下去。当然，到了讲道的后半段，你应当完全只依据神的话语，但在一开始时，尊重非信徒对圣经可靠性的质疑，会让他们更容易继续听下去。

第三，做一些“护教学式的旁注”。尽量在三四个讲道要点中，至少有一个特别回应非信徒的疑惑和关注。你脑海中最好有一份人们对基督教最常见的十个反对意见清单。很多时候，讲道经文会有办法回应这些问题。务必以尊重的态度对待人们对基督教的常见疑问。犹大书提醒我们要“怜悯那些怀疑的人”（犹大书22节）。绝不要让人感觉到“所有聪明人都和我想的一样”。你可以这样说：“我知道这个基督教教义听起来可能很难以接受，但请你考虑一下……”

第四，直接对不同的群体说话，让他们感觉你知道他们在场，仿佛在与他们对话：“如果你是坚定信仰基督的人，你可能会这样想——但这段经文回应了你的担忧”；或者说：“如果你不是基督徒，或对信仰还不确定，你可能会觉得这一点很狭隘——但经文在这里给出了回应。”

第五，注意讲道的气质和态度。纽约城里的年轻世俗人群对任何“做作”的感觉极为敏感。任何过于精致、过于控制、或显得“套话”的表达，都会被他们视为推销，感到反感。如果讲道人使用非包容性的性别语言、对其他宗教发表讽刺性的言论、或者使用他们觉得不自然、不真诚的语调，或者使用福音派圈内专属术语，他们都会感到反感。特别是，如果牧师在讲道中大声咆哮，他们会感觉被“训斥”了。那些在中西部听来充满激情的讲道，在城市的某些亚文化中可能听起来像危险的咆哮。

第六，要表现出你对听众熟悉的书籍、杂志、博客、电影、戏剧，以及日常生活经验的了解。提到它们，并从圣经的角度去解读。但也要确保你阅读并体验了城市生活中各个观点光谱上的内容。真正的“城市性”表现之一，就是你能理解、欣赏、并消化多元的人类观点。
在我最初在纽约的几年里，我经常阅读《纽约客》（精致的世俗文化）、《大西洋月刊》（多元杂志）、《国家》（较老牌的左翼世俗杂志）、《周刊标准》（保守但博学）、《新共和》（多元且博学）、《乌特恩读者》（新纪元另类刊物）、《连线》（硅谷自由派杂志）、《第一事工》（保守派天主教杂志）。每当我阅读时，我总是在脑海中想象自己在和作者们就基督信仰展开对话。我几乎从不读一本杂志而不从中获得至少一小片讲道灵感。

7. 对艺术性与创造力的坚持

根据美国人口普查数据，从1970年到1990年，自我描述为“艺术家”的人数增长了两倍多，从73.7万人增加到170万人。1990年之后，这个数字又增长了16%，接近200万。职业艺术家主要集中在大城市中，因此，在城市里，艺术被高度重视，而在非城市地区，艺术通常很少受到直接关注。城市教会必须意识到这一点。

首先，在敬拜和各项事工中，教会应当对艺术技能设立高标准。如果没有这样的标准，你的教会在文化上就会显得与城市居民格格不入，因为城市居民即便在街头，也被高水准的艺术表现所包围——有才华的艺术家在街头歌唱和表演。

其次，城市教会不应仅仅把艺术家视为拥有某些技能的人。教会必须以敬拜者和听众的身份与他们建立联系，让他们感受到，无论是他们的作品，还是他们本人的存在，都是这个社区所珍视的。这可以通过多种方式实现。例如，要对所在地区或城市特有的艺术传统保持敏感（比如，纳什维尔是音乐之都；新英格兰和中西部有许多作家；新墨西哥州则是视觉艺术家的聚集地）。花时间倾听教会中艺术家和音乐人的声音，了解当地艺术群体的特点，以及创作过程的本质。尽量与本地艺术家和音乐人合作，而不是频繁邀请你最喜欢的外地艺术家来举办演出或展览。当你使用艺术家的恩赐时，要尊重他们对音乐和艺术呈现方式的建议，不要只是简单地下达指令。

——神赐给我们城市，是为了祂的旨意。即使罪破坏了城市，我们仍应该用福音的资源去修复破碎的城市。耶稣亲自进入了城市，并且被钉死在“城门外”（希伯来书13:12），这是圣经中关于被弃绝的一个隐喻。凭着祂的恩典，耶稣失去了“现今的城”，使我们得以成为“未来之城”的子民（希伯来书11:10；12:22），好让我们在现今之城中作盐作光（马太福音5:13-16）。

因此，我们呼吁神的百姓认清并拥抱城市所具有的战略性重要性，从世界各地每一个角落回应这紧迫的呼召——在城市中、为城市而活。
《城市异象》（City Vision）认同神对城市的创造性旨意，并呼吁神的子民在人的城市中，成为神的城市。

QUESTIONS FOR DISCUSSION AND REFLECTION

  1. If you are not located in a city, how might City Vision shape and improve the fruitfulness of your current ministry?
  2. How is agglomeration evident around you? Which types of trades, skills, inventors, or culture makers are concentrated most highly in your area? In what ways can your ministry seek face-to-face opportunities to minister to and through this population - that is, to become an “agglomerizing” church?
  3. Keller writes, “The city itself brings the gospel to us. The city will challenge us to discover the power of the gospel in new ways.” How does this chapter suggest this happens? How have you experienced this?
  4. Which of the seven features of a church for the city does your church currently exhibit? How might those outside your community answer this question?

I have made as strenuous a case as I can that the city is one of the highest priorities for Christian life and mission in the twenty-first century. Now I want to press even further. These chapters on City Vision may have given you the idea that I think all Christians should move into cities and serve there. To be clear, this is not what I am saying. I believe there must be Christians and churches everywhere there are people. In one sense, there are no “little” places or people.¹ God loves to use unimportant people (1 Cor 1:26-31) and unlikely places (John 1:46) to do his work. Jesus wasn’t from Rome or even Jerusalem but was born in Bethlehem and raised in Nazareth—perhaps to make this very point. We have been told that now something like 50 percent of the world’s population live in cities — but this means that half the population does not live in urban areas, and therefore we must not discourage or devalue gospel ministry in the hundreds of thousands of towns and villages on earth. And ministry in small towns may not change a country, but it surely can have a major impact in its region.2

And yet a thought experiment may be illuminating here. Imagine you are in charge of establishing new churches in two different towns - one has a hundred residents, while the other has ten thousand residents. Imagine also that you have only four church planters. Where would you send them? Regardless of philosophy, I doubt anyone would send two church planters to each town on the premise that all places are equally important in ministry. It simply would not be good stewardship of God’s human resources to send two pastors to a town with only a hundred residents. It is good stewardship, though, to insist that we should increase our attention and emphasis on urban ministry in a day when nonurban areas typically have more churches than cities and when cities are increasingly exerting more influence on how human life is lived in the world.

So I am not saying that all Christians should pack up and go to live and minister in urban areas. What I am saying is that the cities of the world are grievously underserved by the church because, in general, the people of the world are moving into cities faster than churches are. And I am seeking to use all the biblical, sociological, missiological, ecclesial, and rhetorical resources at my disposal to help the church (particularly in the United States) reorient itself to address this deficit.

But the call to the city doesn’t end there. Everywhere in the world is more urban than it was ten or twenty years ago. Wherever you live, work, and serve, the city is coming to you. In a sense, every church can and must become a church for its particular city - whether that city is a great metropolis, a university town, or a village. As a result, I believe you can benefit by allowing yourself and your ministry to be intentionally shaped by the realities and patterns of urban life and culture. In order to accomplish this, we must look first at how the dynamics of the city affect our lives and then consider how churches with City Vision will minister in response to these dynamics.

HOW THE CITY WORKS ON US

By many people’s reckoning, the “death of distance” should have led to a decline in cities, but it has not. If you can learn things over the Internet, the thinking went, why pay big-city prices for housing? But real learning, communication, and community are far more complex than we may care to acknowledge. A great deal of research has shown that face-to-face contact and learning can never be fully replaced by any other kind.

It is no surprise, then, that research shows us that productivity is significantly higher for companies that locate near the geographic center of “inventive activity” in their industry. Why? Proximity to others working in your field enables the infinite number of interactions, many of them informal, that turns neophytes into experts more quickly and helps experts stimulate each other to new insights. Edward Glaeser observes, “Much of the value of a dense work environment comes from unplanned meetings and observing the random doings of the people around you. Video conferencing will never give a promising young worker the ability to learn by observing the day-to-day operations of a successful mentor.”3 Other studies reveal that a high percentage of patent applications cited older patents in the same metropolitan region, so “even in our age of information technology, ideas are often geographically localized.”4

Urban theorists call this “agglomeration.” Agglomeration refers to the economic and social benefits of physically locating near one another. It is not surprising, then, that more movies are produced in Los Angeles and Toronto than in Atlanta, because those cities have far larger pools of skilled laborers — writers, directors, actors, technicians — who can make movies happen. It is not surprising that new innovations in financial services come out of Manhattan or new technologies out of Silicon Valley. Why? Agglomeration. The physical clustering of thousands of people who work in the same field naturally generates new ideas and enterprises. But the benefits of agglomeration are not limited to locating near people who, like you, work in the same field. There are benefits to be reaped of living near large groups of people who are unlike you but who have skills that supplement yours.

A good case study is the world of the arts. “Artistic movements are often highly localized,” even more so than in other fields. Urban scholar Elizabeth Currid interviewed New York City cultural producers (fashion designers, musicians, and fine artists) and gatekeepers (gallery owners, curators, and editors), as well as owners of clubs and venues frequented by these groups, people in the media and sometimes the academy, the directors of foundations that supported the arts, and prosperous businessmen and women who often acted as patrons.7 Art “happened” when complex interactions occurred among people in these diverse sectors of the arts ecosystem - not typically through business meetings in workplaces but through interactions at social gatherings and spontaneous meetings in informal situations. Currid found that the cultural economy depends on having “artistic and cultural producers densely agglomerated,” part of a “clustered production system.” When these various classes of persons live in geographical proximity, thousands of enterprise-producing, culture-making, face-to-face interactions take place that could not take place otherwise.2 As Ryan Avent puts it, “Cities are a lot like a good group of friends: what you’re doing isn’t nearly as important as the fact that you’re doing it together.”10

How do the dynamics of agglomeration bear on the real life of the average city Christian? First, the city uniquely links you with many people like you. The city’s challenges and opportunities attract the most talented, ambitious, and restless. So whoever you are, in the city you will encounter people who are far more talented and advanced than you are. Because you are placed among so many like-but-extremely-skilled people in your field, you will be consistently challenged to reach down and do your very best. You feel driven and pressed by the intensity of the place to realize every ounce of your potential. Cities draw and gather together human resources, tapping their potential for cultural development as no other human-life structure can. But sin takes this strength feature of the city - its culture-forming intensity — and turns it into a place tainted by deadly hubris, envy, and burnout. This is what sin does. It is a parasitic perversion of the good. The gospel is needed to resist the dark side of this gift.

FACE-TO-FACE
Two researchers at the University of Michigan gave groups of six students each the rules of a game to play as a team. Some groups were allowed ten minutes of face-to-face interaction to discuss strategy before playing. Other groups were given thirty minutes of electronic interaction before playing the game in the exact same way. The groups that only met electronically before the game did far less well. This and other experiments have helped us to see that “face-to face contact leads to more trust, generosity, and cooperation than any other sort of interaction.”11 Indeed, common sense tells us that we work up to the level of those working around us.

Second, the city uniquely links you with many people unlike you. The city attracts society’s subcultures and minorities, who can band together for mutual support. It is inherently merciful to those with less power, creating safe enclaves for singles, the poor, immigrants, and racial minorities. Because you are placed among such inescapable diversity, you will be consistently challenged in your views and beliefs. You will be confronted with creative, new approaches to thought and practice and must either abandon your traditional ways and beliefs or become far more knowledgeable about and committed to them than you were before. Again, sin takes a strength feature of the city - its culture-forming diversity — and turns it into a place that undermines our prior commitments and worldviews. And again, the gospel is needed to resist the dark side of this gift.

How should Christians respond to these ways that the city challenges us? We must respond with the gospel. And how, exactly, does the gospel help us face these challenges with joy rather than fear? Obviously, it is true that we must bring the gospel to the city and hear the gospel while in the city. But we must also recognize how much the city itself brings the gospel to us. The city will challenge us to discover the power of the gospel in new ways. We will find people who seem spiritually and morally hopeless to us. We will think, “Those people will never believe in Christ.” But a comment such as this is revealing in itself. If salvation is truly by grace, not by virtue and merit, why should we think that anyone is less likely than ourselves to be a Christian? Why would anyone’s conversion be any greater miracle than our own? The city may force us to discover that we don’t really believe in sheer grace, that we really believe God mainly saves nice people - people like us.

In cities we will also meet a lot of people who hold to other religions or to no religion who are wiser, kinder, and more thoughtful than we are, because even after growth in grace, many Christians are weaker people than many non-Christians. When this surprises you, reflect on it. If the gospel of grace is true, why would we think that Christians are a better kind of person than non-Christians? These living examples of common grace may begin to show us that even though we intellectually understand the doctrine of justification by faith alone, functionally we continue to assume that salvation is by moral goodness and works.

Early in Redeemer’s ministry, we discovered it was misguided for Christians to feel pity for the city, and it was harmful to think of ourselves as its “savior.” We had to humbly learn from and respect our city and its people. Our relationship with them had to be a consciously reciprocal one. We had to be willing to see God’s common grace in their lives. We had to learn that we needed them to fill out our own understanding of God and his grace, just as they needed us.

I believe many Christians in the West avoid the city because it is filled with “the other.” Because cities are filled with people who are completely unlike us, many Christians find this disorienting. Deep down, we know we don’t like these people or don’t feel safe around them. But see how easily we forget the gospel! After all, in the gospel we learn of a God who came and lived among us, became one of us, and loved us to the death, even though we were wholly other from him. The city humbles us, showing us how little we are actually shaped by the story and pattern of the gospel.

The gospel alone can give us the humility (“I have much to learn from the city”), the confidence (“I have much to give to the city”), and the courage (“I have nothing to fear from the city”) to do effective ministry that honors God and blesses others. And in time we will see that, for our own continuing spiritual growth and well-being, we need the city perhaps more than the city needs us.

WHAT SHOULD CHRISTIANS DO ABOUT CITIES?

If this is how the city can change us for the better, what can we do to return the favor?

  1. Christians should develop appreciative attitudes toward the city. In obedience to God, Jonah went to the city of Nineveh, but he didn’t love it. In the same way, Christians may come to the city out of a sense of duty to God while being filled with great disdain for the density and diversity of the city. But for ministry in cities to be effective, it is critical that Christians appreciate cities. They should love city life and find it energizing. 12 Why is this so important?
    First, because so many who live in and have influence in the city do actually enjoy living there. If you try to draw them into your church, they will quickly pick up on your negative attitude, which can erect a barrier in their willingness to listen to the gospel. Second, if a church consists primarily of people who dislike urban living, those people won’t be staying very long. Your church will be plagued with huge turnover (as if turnover and transience aren’t enough of a problem already in the city!).
    Preaching and teaching that produce a city-positive church must constantly address the common objections to city living, which include beliefs that city life is “less healthy,” too expensive, and an inferior place to raise families. Two additional objections are especially prevalent. One objection I commonly hear is this: “The country is wholesome; the city is corrupting.” Christians should be able to recognize the bad theology (as well as bad history) behind this idea. Liberal humanism of the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries viewed human nature as intrinsically good and virtuous, so they concluded that human problems came from wrong socialization. In other words, we become violent and antisocial because of our environment. They taught that human society-especially urban society-teaches us to be selfish and violent. As we have seen, however, the Bible teaches that the city is simply a magnifying glass for the human heart. It brings out whatever is already inside. In the previous chapter, we examined the city’s strengths for culture making, as well as its spiritual dangers. But we must remember that the city itself is not to blame for the evil that humans have sinfully brought into it.
    Here is another common objection: “The country inspires; faith dies in the city.” While the countryside can indeed inspire, it is quite wrong to say that the urban environment is a harder environment to find and grow in faith. As we noted earlier, many people coming from regions where Christianity is suppressed by the culture hear the gospel for the first time in the great cities where there is more of a “free market” of ideas. Millions of people who are virtually cut off from gospel witness are reachable if they emigrate to cities. Also, many who were raised as nominal Christians come to the cities where they are challenged in new ways and brought to vital, solid faith in the process. I have seen this occur thousands of times during my ministry at Redeemer. The city is, in fact, a spiritual hotbed where people both lose faith and find it in ways that do not happen in more monolithic, less pluralistic settings. This is, yet again, part of the tension of the city we see addressed in the Bible (see chapter 11).
    Sometimes the contrast of the countryside and the city is drawn even more starkly. My colleague at Westminster, Harvie Conn, told me about a man who said to him, “God made the country, and man built the suburbs, but the devil made the city.” The theology behind this statement is dubious to say the least. And theologically, it is not a good idea to think of the countryside as intrinsically more pleasing to God. An urban missionary, Bill Krispin, explains why. Bill once said to me, “The country is where there are more plants than people; the city is where there are more people than plants. And since God loves people much more than plants, he loves the city more than the country.” I think this is solid theological logic. The apex of creation is, after all, the making of male and female in the image of God (Gen 1:26-27). Therefore, cities, which are filled with people, are absolutely crammed full of what God considers the most beautiful sight in his creation. As we have noted before, cities have more “image of God” per square inch than anywhere else, and so we must not idealize the country as somehow a more spiritual place than the city. Even those (like Wendell Berry) who lift up the virtues of rural living outline a form of human community just as achievable in cities as in small towns.

    WENDELL BERRY AND THE “AGRARIAN MIND”
    Many people point to the essayist Wendell Berry as a leading light of modern agrarians who seem to make a strong case for rural living over urban living. However, while Berry does laud the life of the farm and the small town, he defines the “agrarian mind” as essentially that which values the local:
    The agrarian mind is… local. It must know on intimate terms the local plants and animals and local soils; it must know local possibilities and impossibilities, opportunities and hazards. It depends and insists on knowing very particular local histories and biographies.13
    He goes on to speak of the agrarian mind as (1) valuing work not for the money it can command but for what it provides for human flourishing; (2) valuing work that makes things that are concrete, durable, and useful; (3) embracing humility and having little need for growth and wealth; and (4) holding a commitment to a particular place for a lifetime and to conducting one’s work, recreation, family life in the same place and within a web of thick, long-term, local personal relationships. Berry contrasts this with an “industrial mind” characterized by pride and a lack of respect and gratitude for nature and limitations and manifesting itself in exploitation and greed.
    What this means, I believe, is that a person with an “agrarian” mind can live in a city very well. It is illuminating to compare the seminal work of Jane Jacobs (The Death and Life of the Great American Cities) with Berry’s work. Jacobs was as committed as Berry to the importance of neighborhood — of local economies in which members of the neighborhood knew each other, had regular dealings with each other, and identified their own interests with the interests of their neighbors.
    How can you as a church or an individual live out this value if you are not located near a metropolitan area? I believe the best strategy is to include urban ministry in your global missions portfolio. This may mean supporting individual missionaries who serve in cities; an even more effective strategy is to support church-planting ministries in global cities. 15 Another promising trend is the creation of metro-wide partnerships of churches and other agencies to support the holistic work of spreading the gospel throughout the city.

  2. Christians should become a dynamic counterculture where they live. It will not be enough for Christians to simply live as individuals in the city, however. They must live as a particular kind of community. In the Bible’s tale of two cities, man’s city is built on the principle of personal aggrandizement (Gen 11:1 - 4), while “the city of our God… is beautiful in its loftiness, the joy of the whole earth” (Ps 48:1-2). In other words, the urban society God wants is based on service, not selfishness. Its purpose is to spread joy from its cultural riches to the whole world. Christians are called to be an alternate city within every earthly city, an alternate human culture within every human culture-to show how sex, money, and power can be used in nondestructive ways; to show how classes and races that cannot get along outside of Christ can get along in him; and to show how it is possible to cultivate by using the tools of art, education, government, and business to bring hope to people rather than despair or cynicism.
    Someone may ask, “Can’t Christians be an alternate city out in the suburbs?” Absolutely! This is one of our universal callings as Christians. Yet again, though, the earthly city magnifies the effect of this alternate city and its unique forms of ministry. In racially homogeneous places, it is harder to show in pragmatic ways how the gospel uniquely undermines racial barriers (see Eph 2:11-22). In places where few artists live, it is pragmatically harder to show the gospel’s unique effect on art. In economically homogeneous places, physically removed from the human poverty that is so pervasive in the world, it is pragmatically harder for Christians to realize how much money they are spending on themselves. What is possible in the suburbs and rural towns comes into sharper focus in the city. The city illustrates in vivid detail the unique community life that is produced as the fruit of the gospel.
  3. Christians should be a community radically committed to the good of their city as a whole. It is not enough for Christians to form a culture that merely “counters” the values of the city. We must also commit, with all the resources of our faith and life, to serve sacrificially the good of the whole city, and especially the poor.
    It is especially important that Christians not be seduced by the mind-set of the “consumer city” — the city as adult playground. Cities attract young adults with a dizzying variety of amenities and diversions that no suburb or small town can reproduce. Even when holding constant factors such as income, education, marital status, and age, city residents are far more likely to go to a concert, visit a museum, go to the movies, or stop into a local pub than people outside of urban areas.16 On top of this, urban residents, more than their country cousins, tend to take an unmistakable pride in sophistication and hipness. Christians must not be tempted to come to the city (or at least not to remain in the city) for these motivations. Christians indeed can be enriched by the particular joys of urban life, but ultimately they live in cities to serve.

    Jacobs called this “eyes on the street”- people who felt ownership of the environment, were committed to the common welfare, and watched the street, willing to take action if necessary. Both urban neighborhoods and small towns have mixed-land use in which residences, shops, businesses, schools, and so forth were all within walking distance of each other, which leads to more human-scale, local economy.
    Jacobs’s book was a polemic against the “suburbanization” of the city occurring in the 1960s by planners who were destroying local neighborhoods in order to build large-scale, homogeneous areas of retail, business offices, or residences. The New Urbanism today revels in the very small-scale, walkable, mixed-use communities that Jacobs describes. Political theorist Mark Mitchell writes these interesting words:
    Ultimately, healthy communities will only be realized when individuals commit to a particular place and to particular neighbors in the long-term work of making a place, of recognizing and enjoying the responsibilities and pleasures of membership in a local community. These good things are not the unique provenance of agrarian or rural settings. They can and have been achieved in urban and town settings. 14

Christians must work for the peace, security, justice, and prosperity of their neighbors, loving them in word and deed, whether or not they believe the same things we believe. In Jeremiah 29:7, God calls the Jews not just to live in the city but to love it and work for its shalom - its economic, social, and spiritual flourishing. Christians are, indeed, citizens of God’s heavenly city, but these citizens are always the best possible citizens of their earthly city. They walk in the steps of the One who laid down his life for his opponents.

Christians in cities must become a counterculture for the common good. They must be radically different from the surrounding city, yet radically committed to its benefit. They must minister to the city out of their distinctive Christian beliefs and identity. We see this balance demonstrated when we examine the early Christian understanding of citizenship. Paul used his Roman citizenship as leverage and defense in the service of his wider missional aims (Acts 16:37-38; 22:25-29; cf. 21:39; 23:27). He tells the Ephesians that because of the work of the gospel, “You are no longer foreigners and aliens, but fellow citizens with God’s people and members of God’s household, built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus himself as the chief cornerstone” (Eph 2:19-20, emphasis mine).

And to the church in Philippi, Paul writes, “Our citizenship is in heaven. And we eagerly await a Savior from there, the Lord Jesus Christ, who, by the power that enables him to bring everything under his control, will transform our lowly bodies so that they will be like his glorious body” (Phil 3:20-21). Though Roman citizenship was a beneficial badge and indeed carried valuable social status, Paul is clear that Christians are, first and foremost, citizens of heaven.

Joseph presents an interesting Old Testament demonstration of this tension. When he is made prince of the land (Gen 41:39-40), he pursues the wealth and good of Egypt, just as he had previously done in prison and in Potiphar’s house. Through his pursuit of the good of the city, salvation comes to the people of God. This story is especially striking because God puts Joseph in the position to save the city from hunger, not just the people of God.

In the end, Christians live not to increase the prosperity of our own tribe and group through power plays and coercion but to serve the good of all the people of the city (regardless of what beliefs others hold). While secularism tends to make people individualistic, and traditional religiosity tends to make people tribal, the gospel should destroy the natural selfishness of the human heart and lead Christians to sacrificial service that benefits the whole city. If Christians seek power and influence, they will arouse fear and hostility. If instead they pursue love and seek to serve, they will be granted a great deal of influence by their neighbors, a free gift given to trusted and trustworthy people.

Christians should seek to live in the city, not to use the city to build great churches, but to use the resources of the church to seek a great, flourishing city. We refer to this as a “city growth” model of ministry rather than a strictly “church growth” model. It is the ministry posture that arises out of a Center Church theological vision.

SEVEN FEATURES OF A CHURCH FOR THE CITY

It is infinitely easier to talk about living out this posture “on the ground” in our cities than to actually do it. The challenge is to establish churches and other ministries that effectively engage the realities of the cities of the world. The majority of evangelical Protestants who presently control the United States mission apparatus are typically white and nonurban in background. They neither understand nor in most cases enjoy urban life. As I have been arguing, many of the prevailing ministry methods are forged outside of urban areas and then simply imported, with little thought given to the unnecessary barriers this practice erects between urban dwellers and the gospel. Consequently, when ministers go into a city, they often find it especially hard to evangelize and win urban people — and equally difficult to disciple converts and prepare Christians for life in a pluralistic, secular, culturally engaged setting. Just as the Bible needs to be translated into its readers’ vernacular, so the gospel needs to be embodied and communicated in ways that are understandable to the residents of a city.

I believe churches that minister in ways that are indigenous and honoring to a city — whatever its size — exhibit seven vital features:

  1. respect for urban sensibility
  2. unusual sensitivity to cultural differences
  3. commitment to neighborhood and justice
  4. integration of faith and work
  5. bias for complex evangelism
  6. preaching that both attracts and challenges urban people
  7. commitment to artistry and creativity

We’ll unpack each of these characteristics in more detail here, as well as note where several of them are covered more fully in later chapters of the book.

  1. Respect for urban sensibility. Our culture is largely invisible to us, which is why it is revelatory to leave one’s society and live in a very different culture for a while. This experience enables us to see how much of our thought and behavior is not based on universal common sense but on a particular cultural practice. And it is often easier to see the big cultural differences than the small ones. Christians who move to cities within their own country (or even region) often underestimate the importance of the small cultural differences they have with urbanites. They speak and act in ways that are out of step with urban sensibilities, and if this is pointed out to them, they despise the criticism as snobbishness.

Most American evangelical churches are middle class in their corporate culture. That is, they value privacy, safety, homogeneity, sentimentality, space, order, and control. In contrast, the city is filled with ironic, edgy, diversity-loving people who have a high tolerance for ambiguity and disorder. On the whole, they value intensity and access more than comfort and control. Center-city people appreciate sophistication in communication content and mode, and yet they eschew what they consider slickness, hype, and excessive polish. Being able to strike these nuanced balances cannot be a matter of performance. Christian leaders and ministers must genuinely belong to the culture so they begin to intuitively understand it.

THE TRUE CHURCH
We must understand that the seven characteristics of a church that is effective in urban engagement in no way replaces the more foundational question of what, biblically speaking, constitutes a true church.17 The marks of a true church — what it does — are the Word rightly believed and declared, and the sacraments and discipline rightly administered. The purposes of the church—what it aims to accomplish with these ministries — are the worship of God, the edification of the saints, and the witness to the world. All true churches have these characteristics. Yet a church may have all these biblical marks and qualities, and its ministry could be wholly unfruitful in the city. This is true for the same reason that every preacher who believes the Word rightly and expounds it faithfully will nonetheless preach sermons that are quite useful for a certain kind of hearer and yet confusing and even unhelpful for another. For more on this dynamic, see the Introduction and part 3 (“Gospel Contextualization”).

Center-city culture in particular is filled with well-informed, verbal, creative, and assertive people who do not respond well to authoritative pronouncements. They appreciate thoughtful presentations that are well argued and provide opportunities for communication and feedback. If a church’s ministers are unable to function in an urban culture, choosing instead to create a “missionary compound” within the city, they will soon discover they cannot reach out, convert, or incorporate the people who live in their neighborhoods.

  1. Unusual sensitivity to cultural differences. Effective leaders in urban ministry are acutely aware of the different people groups within their area. Because cities are dense and diverse, they are always culturally complex. This means not only that different races and socioeconomic classes are in closer physical proximity than in other settings, but that other factors, such as ethnicity, age, vocation, and religion, create a matrix of subcultures. In New York City, for example, older downtown artists (over the age of fifty) are significantly different from younger artists. The Jewish community in New York City is vast and variegated. The cultural differences among African-Americans, Africans, and Afro-Caribbeans are marked, even as they share a broad sense of identity over against white culture. Some groups clash more with particular groups than others (e.g., African-Americans and Koreans in some cities). The gay community is divided between those who want to be more integrated into mainstream culture and those who do not. Asians talk about being “1.0, 1.5, or second generation.”
    Fruitful urban ministers must first notice these differences and avoid thinking they are inconsequential. Then they must seek to understand these different people respectfully and navigate accordingly in communication and ministry without unnecessarily offending others. In fact, urban ministers should constantly surprise others with how well they understand other cultures. If you are an Anglo man, for example, you should occasionally hear something like, “I didn’t think a white man would know about that.”
    Those raised in culturally homogeneous areas who move to a city soon come to realize how many of their attitudes and habits — which they thought of as simply universal common were deeply tied to their race and class. For instance, Anglo-Americans don’t see themselves as making decisions, expressing emotions, handling conflict, scheduling time and events, and communicating in a “white” way—they just think they are doing things the way everybody knows things ought to be done. In an urban setting, people typically become more sensitive to these blind spots. Why? Because they are acquainted with the aspirations, fears, passions, and patterns of several different groups of people through involvement with friends, neighbors, and colleagues who come from these groups. They have personally experienced how members of different ethnic or even vocational groups use an identical word or phrase to mean different things.
    No church can be all things to all people. There is no culturally neutral way of doing ministry. The urban church will have to choose practices that reflect the values of some cultural group, and in so doing it will communicate in ways that different cultural groups will see and hear differently. As soon as it chooses a language to preach in, or the music it will sing, it is making it easier for some people to participate and more difficult for others.
    Nevertheless, the ever-present challenge is to work to make urban ministry as broadly appealing as possible and as inclusive of different cultures as possible. One of the ways to do this is to have a racially diverse set of leaders “up front.” When we see someone like ourselves speaking or leading a meeting, we feel welcomed in a hard-to-define way. Another way is to listen long and hard to people in our congregation who feel underrepresented by the way our church does ministry. In the end, we must accept the fact that urban churches will experience recurring complaints of racial insensitivity. Urban ministers live with the constant sense that they are failing to embrace as many kinds of people as they should. But they willingly and gladly embrace the challenge of building racial and cultural diversity in their churches and see these inevitable criticisms as simply one of the necessary costs of urban ministry.

  2. Commitment to neighborhood and justice. Urban neighborhoods are highly complex. Even gentrified neighborhoods, full of professionals, may actually be “bipolar.” That is, alongside the well-off residents in their expensive apartments, private schools, and various community associations and clubs is often a “shadow neighborhood” filled with many who live in poverty, attend struggling schools, and reside in government housing.

Urban ministers learn how to exegete their neighborhoods to grasp their sociological complexity. They are obsessed with studying and learning about their local communities. (Academic training in urban ethnography, urban demographics, and urban planning can be a great help to a church’s lay leaders and staff members.) But faithful churches do not exegete their neighborhoods simply to target people groups, although evangelistic outreach is one of the goals. They are looking for ways to strengthen the health of their neighborhoods, making them safer and more humane places for people to live. This is a way to seek the welfare of the city, in the spirit of Jeremiah 29. Urban churches train their members to be neighbors in the city, not just consumers. As we have seen, cities attract young professionals by providing something of a “theme park” with thousands of entertainment and cultural options, and many new urban residents tend to view the city as simply a place where they can have fun, develop a résumé, and make friends who will be of help to them in the future. They plan to do this for a few years and then leave. In other words, they are using the city rather than living in it as neighbors (as Jesus defines the term in the parable of the Good Samaritan in Luke 10:25-37).

In the middle years of the twentieth century, Jane Jacobs wrote the classic The Death and Life of Great American Cities. Jacobs’s great contribution came in demonstrating the importance of street life for civil society. She observed how foot traffic and street life and a mixture of residences and businesses (viewed negatively by suburban zoners and even many urban planners at the time) were critical for economic vitality, for safety, for healthy human relationships, and for a strong social fabric. Jacobs was a major opponent of large-scale urban projects in the mid- twentieth century, the very projects that eventually ruined neighborhoods and the street life she had promoted.

Jacobs writes the following:

Jacobs explains how each of these is indeed a neighborhood and how each requires the participation of all urban residents to keep the city healthy. In other words, you must know your literal neighbors (your street neighborhood) and have some familiarity with the blocks around your residence (your district). And yet this in itself is not enough. “Ward politics” — in which one neighborhood pits its own good against the good of the other parts of the city - is unwholesome and unhealthy. So it is important for Christians and Christian ministries to find ways to be neighbors to the whole city, not just to their immediate street neighborhood. Failing to engage in the interests of the entire city often results in a lack of involvement in helping the poorest residents of the city. It is equally important that a church not minister just to the whole city while ignoring its local neighborhood. If this happens, a church can become a commuter church that no longer knows how to reach the kind of people who live in their immediate vicinity.

Urban churches, then, should be known in their community as a group of people who are committed to the good of all their neighbors, near and far. It takes this type of holistic commitment from all residents and institutions to maintain a good quality of life in the city, and a church that is not engaged in this manner will (rightly) be perceived by the city as tribal.

  1. Integration of faith and work. Traditional evangelical churches tend to emphasize personal piety and rarely help believers understand how to maintain and apply their Christian beliefs and practice in the worlds of the arts, business, scholarship, and government. Many churches do not know how to disciple members without essentially pulling them out of their vocations and inviting them to become heavily involved in church activities. In other words, Christian discipleship is interpreted as consisting largely of activities done in the evening or on the weekend.

    RENTERS AND NEIGHBORHOOD
    One “occupational hazard” of urban church planting is having a new church rent its worship space and therefore only corporately reside in a particular neighborhood for the few hours during which they rent the space. Often this means, on the one hand, that the neighbors have no idea there is a church meeting in that space; on the other hand, church members feel very little responsibility to “love their neighbors.” It is important for churches that rent space to own their neighborhood. Church leaders should therefore be intentional about inhabiting their neighborhood. They should go to local community boards and neighborhood association meetings, as well as contact local government officials and representatives to discover how they can best serve the needs of the neighborhood. This has not been a strength of Redeemer Church in the past, and we are working to change this now that we have moved into our first owned space on the Upper West Side of Manhattan.

Many vocations of city dwellers — fashion and the media, the arts and technology, business and finance, politics and public policy — demand great amounts of time and energy. These are typically not forty-hour-a-week jobs. They are jobs that dominate a person’s life and thinking, and urban Christians are confronted with ethical and theological issues every day in the workplace. Preaching and ministry in urban churches must therefore help congregants form networks of believers within their vocational field and assist them in working through the theological, ethical, and practical issues they face in their work.

In addition to the practical issues of how to do their individual work, urban Christians need a broader vision of how Christianity engages and influences culture. As we have discussed, cities are culture-forming incubators, and believers in such places have a significant need for guidance on how Christian faith should express itself in public life. For more on this subject, see part 5 (Cultural Engagement) and part 7 (Integrative Ministry).

  1. Bias for complex evangelism. Two kinds of urban churches can grow without evangelism. The first is the ethnic/immigrant church. While many ethnic churches are evangelistic, it is possible for them to grow without conversions, as new immigrants are always looking for connections to their own people in the city. Ethnic churches therefore become informal “community centers” for people of the same race and subculture — and they can grow simply by gathering new immigrants who want to be part of the fellowship. Second, churches in Western center cities can grow without evangelism by meeting the needs of one particular “immigrant subculture” - evangelical Christians-through preaching, music, children’s programs, and so forth. In the past, in cities outside of the southern and midwestern United States, there simply was no constituency of “church shoppers” to attract. However, during the urban renaissance of the last fifteen years, this situation has changed, and cities have become desirable destinations for young adults from all over the country. Redeemer Presbyterian Church’s experience is a good way to understand this phenomenon.
    Redeemer was begun in Manhattan at the end of the 1980s, during the end of an era of urban decline. Crime was high and the city was losing population, and there were few or no Christians moving into New York City from the rest of the country. During the first several years of Redeemer’s existence, it grew through aggressive but winsome evangelism. An evangelistic consciousness permeated the young congregation, and several hundred people came to faith out of nonbelief and nonchurched backgrounds over the first five years.
    By the mid-1990s, the urban regeneration had begun, and we noticed that young adults from Christian backgrounds were moving to the cities. By the end of the decade, we found that we could (and did) grow substantially by drawing these folks in and helping them live out their Christian lives in service to the city. This is, of course, a very good and important thing, but it can also mask a lack of evangelism, and in the end, nonevangelistic church growth can’t help reach the city in the most profound way. Recognizing this danger, our church has recommitted itself to reigniting our ethos of evangelism.
    Not only must an urban church be committed to evangelism; it must be committed to the complexity of urban evangelism. There is no “one size fits all” method or message that can be used with all urban residents. For example, it is impossible for a Christian minister in London to share the gospel in exactly the same way with an atheist native Scot or a Muslim from Pakistan
    • yet they may both be the minister’s literal neighbors. Urban evangelism requires immersion in the various cultures’ greatest hopes, fears, views, and objections to Christianity. It requires a creative host of different means and venues, and it takes great courage.

  2. Preaching that both attracts and challenges urban people. Perhaps the greatest challenge for preachers in urban contexts is the fact that many secular and nonbelieving people may be in the audience. Of course, urban congregations can be as ingrown as any others, but certain dynamics of urban life can more readily make city church gatherings “spiritually mixed” and filled with nonbelievers. Urban centers have higher percentages of single people, and it is far easier for a single Christian to get a single, non-Christian friend to come to a church gathering than it is for a Christian family to get an entire non-Christian family to come. Singles make unilateral decisions (without having to consult others), tend to spend more time out of their homes, and are more open to new experiences. Also, cities are not “car cultures”; they are pedestrian cultures, and it is not unusual for people to simply walk off the street into church out of curiosity. Finally, cities are places where people come to “make it,” are often separated from extended families, and are under a great deal of stress. As a result, urban people are often in a spiritual search mode and can be hungry for human connection and a sense of belonging.
    The challenge for the urban preacher is to preach in a way that edifies believers and engages and evangelized nonbelievers at the same time. We will speak more about evangelistic worship in chapter 23. But here are some pointers.
    First, be sure to preach sermons that ground moral exhortation in Christ and his work (see the section in chapter 6 titled “Preaching for Renewal”). Show how we live as we should only if we believe in and apply Christ’s work of salvation as we should. In this way nonbelievers hear the gospel each week, yet believers have their issues and problems addressed as well.
    Second, be very careful to think about your audience’s premises. Don’t assume, for example, that everyone listening trusts the Bible. So when you make a point from the Bible, it will help to show that some other trusted authority (such as empirical science) agrees with the Bible. Use it to promote trust of the Bible, saying something like, “See, the Bible was telling us centuries ago what science now confirms.” That will help convince your hearers of that point so you can move on. By the end of the sermon, of course, you will be appealing only to God’s Word, but in the early stages of the sermon you invite nonbelievers along by showing respect for their doubts about the Bible’s reliability.
    Third, do “apologetic sidebars.” Try to devote one of the three or four sermon points mainly to the doubts and concerns of nonbelievers. Keep in your head a list of the ten or so biggest objections people have to Christianity. More often than not, the particular Scripture text has some way to address them. Always treat people’s typical doubts about Christianity with respect. Jude reminds us to “be merciful to those who doubt” (Jude 22). Never give the impression that “all intelligent people think like I do.” Don’t hesitate to say, “I know this Christian doctrine may sound outrageous, but would you consider this…?”
    Fourth, address different groups directly, showing that you know they are there, as though you are dialoguing with them: “If you are committed to Christ, you may be thinking this — but the text answers that fear,” or “If you are not a Christian or not sure what you believe, then you surely must think this is narrow-minded - but the text says this, which speaks to this very issue.”
    Fifth, consider demeanor. The young secularists of New York City are extremely sensitive to anything that smacks of artifice to them. Anything that is too polished, too controlled, too canned will seem like salesmanship. They will be turned off if they hear a preacher use noninclusive gender language, make cynical remarks about other religions, adopt a tone of voice they consider forced or inauthentic, or use insider evangelical tribal jargon. In particular, they will feel “beaten up” if a pastor yells at them. The kind of preaching that sounds passionate in the heartland may sound like a dangerous rant in certain subcultures in the city.
    Sixth, show a deep acquaintance with the same books, magazines, blogs, movies, and plays — as well as the daily life experiences — that your audience knows. Mention them and interpret them in light of Scripture. But be sure to read and experience urban life across a spectrum of opinion. There is nothing more truly urban than showing you know, appreciate, and digest a great diversity of human opinion. During my first years in New York, I regularly read The New Yorker (sophisticated secular), The Atlantic (eclectic), The Nation (older, left-wing secular), The Weekly Standard (conservative but erudite), The New Republic (eclectic and erudite), Utne Reader (New Age alternative), Wired (Silicon Valley libertarian), First Things (conservative Catholic). As I read, I imagine dialogues about Christianity with the writers. I almost never read a magazine without getting a scrap of a preaching idea.

  3. Commitment to artistry and creativity. According to the United States census, between 1970 and 1990 the number of people describing themselves as “artist” more than doubled, from 737,000 to 1.7 million. Since 1990, the number of artists continued to grow another 16 percent to nearly two million. Professional artists live disproportionately in major urban areas, and so the arts are held in high regard in the city, while in nonurban areas little direct attention is typically given to them. Urban churches must be aware of this. First, they should have high standards for artistic skill in their worship and ministries. If you do not have such standards, your church will feel culturally remote to the average urban dweller who is surrounded by artistic excellence even on the streets where talented artists sing and perform.
    Second, city churches should think of artists not simply as persons with skills to use. They must connect to them as worshipers and hearers, communicating that they are valued for both their work and their presence in the community. This can be done in a variety of ways. One way includes being sensitive to your own region’s or city’s particular art history (e.g., Nashville is a music center; New England and the Midwest have many writers; New Mexico is a center for visual artists). Take time to listen to the artists and musicians in your church to understand something about the nature of the local artistic community and how the creative process works. Do your best to work with local artists and musicians rather than flying in your favorite artists long-distance for concerts or shows. When you make use of artists’ gifts, take their advice on how the music and the art should be done; don’t simply give orders to them. — God has given us the city for his purposes, and even though sin has harmed it, we should use the resources of the gospel to repair broken cities. Jesus himself went to the city and was crucified “outside the city gate” (Heb 13:12), a biblical metaphor for forsakenness. By his grace, Jesus lost the city-that-was, so we could become citizens of the city-to-come (Heb 11:10; 12:22), making us salt and light in the city-that-is (Matt 5:13-16).

So we urge all the people of God to recognize and embrace the strategic intensity of cities—and therefore to respond to the urgent call to be in the city and for the city from every coordinate on the globe. City Vision recognizes God’s creational intentions for cities and calls the people of God to be the city of God within the city of man.

QUESTIONS FOR DISCUSSION AND REFLECTION

  1. If you are not located in a city, how might City Vision shape and improve the fruitfulness of your current ministry?
  2. How is agglomeration evident around you? Which types of trades, skills, inventors, or culture makers are concentrated most highly in your area? In what ways can your ministry seek face-to-face opportunities to minister to and through this population - that is, to become an “agglomerizing” church?
  3. Keller writes, “The city itself brings the gospel to us. The city will challenge us to discover the power of the gospel in new ways.” How does this chapter suggest this happens? How have you experienced this?
  4. Which of the seven features of a church for the city does your church currently exhibit? How might those outside your community answer this question?