About this Entry
Posted by: madbald

Visit madbald's Xanga Site

Original: 8/4/2008 12:47 AM
Views: 64
Comments: 3
eProps: 2

Read Comments
Post a Comment
Back to Your Xanga Site


Who gave the eProps?
2 eProps!2 eProps! 2 eProps from:
fairseven

Monday, August 04, 2008

 *This is a helpful article that will give some balance to some of you who love Tim Keller and his vision for the city. I greatly respect what he's done via the Redeemer network, but I've noticed that his well-articulated vision for the city has led people to embrace an extremely dogmatic "anti-suburb" mindset. And as some of you know, when people start dogmatizing anything other than the core essential doctrines of the Church, my hair stops growing:)

Redemptive View of Suburbia
by Steve McCoy

There is a growing trend of romanticizing the city. My man-crush, Tim Keller, is a loud and important voice on the strategic need to reach our city-centers. Even more, Keller shows the centrality of the city as the future for God’s people…

I’ve heard Keller elsewhere humorously quip that it’s not a suburb coming down from heaven in Revelation 21, it’s a city. He’s right, of course.

But in consequence I think many who love Keller, including me, tend to over-romanticize the city to the point that we feel we must laugh at suburbia’s ugliness and hyper-consumerism. Commonly the flight to suburbia is seen as fleeing from the city, chasing after the American Dream, a selfish plunge toward more and bigger and better, an escape from the dangers of the city to the suburban facade. There’s some truth there to be sure, but I’m not sure that’s as true as I’ve always assumed.

I think there are some aspects of suburbia that compel us to live for values that the city has pushed aside. Let me point out some that come to mind…

1. Cultivating a Garden
We were kicked out of the Garden of Eden because of our sin. The world lacked the order and beauty of the Garden, but man was commissioned by God to have dominion, which should at least mean that we were to create gardens where they didn’t yet exist. That is still part of our job.

Keller points out that the Garden becomes a City, but I’m not sure that’s the fullest picture. In Revelation 22, as Keller explains in the quote above, there’s a river in the center of the city where we also find the tree of life. It appears the Garden blends into the City.

Our modern cities aren’t necessarily models of blending. Just as architecture in the suburbs is often a facade of the man-made treasures we find in our cities, so gardens in our cities are are often a facade of nature found in and around our suburbs. In our cities we find trees growing out of concrete holes! In the suburbs we find nature intertwined with our architecture. Where our cities have failed, our suburbs have picked up a more heavenly picture of the city.

2. Be Fruitful and Multiply
At creation man was commanded to “be fruitful and multiply.” Kids are the way dominion happens in the world. And it’s not only that we should have a kid, but the more the merrier. Children are a blessing from the Lord, and while the world’s values have created the strong desire to limit childbearing, God values multiplication. While the world’s values say that more children means more burden, God’s values say that more children means more blessing. I don’t see any biblical mandate on how many children to have, but I think there is a biblical mandate to see children as gifts and that we should desire those gifts from God.

Our cities make having multiple children nearly impossible.
There is less living space intended for larger families, at least not larger families who aren’t very rich. Public schools in urban areas are rarely recognized for their academic quality and private schools are typically very expensive. Cities are not good on families, which is why when city-dwellers start having kids they start moving to the suburbs.

Suburbs are known for having good schools and safe neighborhoods. There’s more affordable housing with more space in the house for larger families as well as yards to play in. For what’s wrong in suburbia, it’s a place well-equipped for people who want to “be fruitful and multiply.”

3. Lonely Places
It’s no secret that Jesus would often go to “lonely” places. He would go to fast and prepare for ministry in the wilderness, to pray, to get away from crowds of people, and so on. Lonely places, wilderness places, were normal and accessible. Before his crucifixion Jesus spent time alone in the Garden of Gethsemane, very near Jerusalem.

Our urban environments don’t make the wilderness sorts of lonely places all that accessible. Some may say that we don’t have to create a world that matches the world of Jesus to enjoy similar experiences. True. But Jesus seemed to make such good use of lonely space that the availability of it would be a blessing. I don’t think it’s a stretch to say that the example of Jesus shows a value to wilderness that is worth retaining.

Even when you find some space in the city, say in a local park, it’s full of people spread out trying to find a 10′ by 10′ swath of grass to eat their sandwich and get some “alone time” before trekking back to work on the gray city streets. In suburbia the story is very different. I can get on a bike from the middle of my suburb and get to the middle of nowhere in about 5 minutes. Even in nearer suburbs open, empty space is often much more accessible.

Conclusion
This isn’t an attempt to say someone should choose to live in the suburbs over the urban centers. Go where God wants you to go and live faithfully. Both have wonderful things and terrible things. Both have redeeming qualities and sinful tendencies. This is simply an attempt to think through the redeeming qualities of the suburbs and show how suburbia can be seen, at least in part, as a helpful corrective to what the city lacks.


 Posted 8/4/2008 12:47 AM - 64 Views - 2 eProps - 3 comments

Give eProps or Post a Comment

3 Comments

Visit fairseven's Xanga Site!
Interesting article, pbang. It compelled me to google who Steve McCoy is, and I liked what I saw. Very cool blog that he has that seems to showcase both his faith and his appreciation for culture. I'm looking forward to reading some of his posts in my free time (I already had it bookmarked).

A few questions on your opinions:

1. In McCoy's first argument, do you find that the argument he's making is a bit too strict and unyielding? I certainly do echo his sentiment that Christians in the fallen world should try and emulate the "order and the beauty" of Eden, but the way he fashions every subsequent word appears to suggest that he's making a bit of a literal translation of the Lord's mandate. I'd be onboard with him if we as Christians are to figuratively "create gardens where they [do not] exist," but his argument is a bit unclear to me. Maybe I'm reading his point incorrectly, but it does admittedly look like he's confessing the Christian's responsibility to buy some seeds at Home Depot and start planting trees. I'm not so sure I'd agree with that; it seems far too narrow of a scope.

2. There seems to be a bit of a contradiction in McCoy's second argument, albeit a terribly minor one that probably does not need highlighting. He prefaces his argument by positing his opinion that Scripture does not mandate how many children a Christian family is to have. But his entire argument stems off the presumption that the more children a family has, the better. "Be fruitful and multiply" says the Word -- to me, there's hardly any differentiation between the family that has one child and the family that has eight. And although I can acknowledge that McCoy isn't arguing that one family is necessarily better than the other, it's hard not to be tempted to think that when he's saying that for all practical purposes, suburban families not just have it better, they have it right.

3. I have nothing to say about argument three, except that I disagree, completely and wholeheartedly, with this one.. haha

===
I'm glad McCoy concluded his argument the way he did in efforts to assure his readers that this is far from dogma. I just felt compelled to posit my thoughts cause some parts left me scratching my head thinking "C'mon now. Are you being serious, man?"

Thanks for sharing.
Posted 8/4/2008 3:03 AM by fairseven - reply

Visit madbald's Xanga Site!
Joe, I appreciate your thoughtful comments.
It's good to know that people are still on Xanga:) I was actually thinking of closing my account.
Anyway, I hope my response doesn't sound too preachy. I can't help it sometimes.

[On McCoy's 1st Point]

I agree with the general thrust of his argument. Is he being too strict and unyielding? Well, I'd keep in mind that he's trying to offer a corrective for those who actually do possess a dogmatic anti-suburban mindset. But is he being too strict in his response to them? Maybe I'm wrong, but I honestly don't see it that way. If he argued that every citizen should plant an X number of trees and recycle X percent of their trash and save X number of polar bears, then I'd make the charge that he's not only strict, but that he's also a nut. But all he seems to be saying is that we need to be good stewards of God's creation in its entirety and not neglect to cultivate those things we'd normally see in natural environments (the Garden). Why? Because the biblical city (the New Jerusalem) that's to come will be a healthy blend of "suburban-urban" as our 21st century minds would define each of them. In other words, when the Bible says "city" we shouldn't be automatically equating that to mean "urban" as we'd normally define it. The biblical idea of “heavenly city” or "New Jerusalem" is simply not the same kind of city that the "I love NYC" mind would envision it to be.

Modern day cities are essentially products of market-driven capitalism. This usually results in an over-concentration of people in one specific locale. Within this scheme, sky-scrapers make sense. Narrow streets make sense. Having less kids make sense. Traffic jams, pollution, and high cost of living becomes inevitable. But the imagery of the New Jerusalem that we see in the Bible is something quite different. The New Jerusalem will be completely free from the effects of sin, but it'll also contain some elements of what we see in modern day suburbs and modern day cities. That’s basically McCoy’s MAIN PREMISE in his article. In my view, the PARTICULARS (his 3 points) that he chose to use are actually not all that silly. He's essentially saying that modern day cities i) are not an ideal place to cultivate natural beauty ("Cultivating a Garden"), ii) do not offer enough time and space to grow a family ("Be Fruitful and Multiply"), and iii) do not offer enough time and space to maintain one’s own sanity because of the hectic pace of life and high population density ("Lonely Places"). Thus, he's arguing that the "suburban-urban" blend is closer to the biblical ideal of the New Jerusalem.


[On McCoy's 2nd Point]

On this point, I know plenty of people who think like McCoy. I happen to be one of them.
He does use the language "the more the merrier" but that's not really his main point. It's just a side comment. So I don't think it's fair to say that "his entire argument stems off the presumption that the more children a family has, the better." I think it would be more accurate to say that his entire argument is based on the presumption that viewing children as a blessing (or gift) from God rather than a curse (or burden) is the right thing.

As you know, Scripture doesn’t give each of us a specific number of children we're to have just as it doesn’t give us a specific number of cars or dollars we should possess. But it does lay down some principles for us in terms of how we should view children and how we should view our material possessions (cars and dollars etc). That's what McCoy seems to be getting at. At the end, each person is to live before the Lord seeking a clear conscience on these matters. The truth is that numbers are not what's ULTIMATELY important. You can be equally self-centered and godless in your heart-orientation in having zero children, 1 child, or 18 children, if your intentions are detached from a desire to glorify the Lord. Your heart motivation is what really matters.


[On McCoy's 3rd Point]

I want to give McCoy the benefit of the doubt here, since I’m convinced that he and I essentially share the same biblical worldview. But clearly, I wouldn't have used the language--"lonely places"--in forming his argument. I'm guessing that he was fishing for something catchy to use and decided to go with "lonely places." Oh well.

I think I get his point though because I see it(constant motion without any sense of inner-stability) in so many people who live the city life. They're so busy and have no time to refocus themselves. It's also true that it's hard for most of them to find a quiet place to meaningfully reflect and pray due to time and space constraints. Sooner or later, they lose sight of what's most important in life. They also tend to become cold, rash, and flat out rude. From personal experience (even though it would be impossible to measure), I'd bet that there's a direct positive co-relation between the population density of the city and the rudeness of its people. Generally speaking, of course...

And I know that McCoy doesn't quite say it this way, but I'm 99% sure that he'd agree with everything I've wrote above:)

In conclusion, I see McCoy offering a much needed theological corrective to what I’m seeing as a result of Keller’s influence. I don't blame Keller. I just think that people tend to take what is good and unintentionally fall into extremes easily. Ironically, I believe that when Keller was forming his vision for the city, he was trying to provide a corrective for those who possessed a dogmatic anti-URBAN (anti-NYC) mindset, because they viewed the city as extremely corrupt and irredeemable.
Now the pendulum has swung the other way and people like McCoy are speaking out. I think that's a good thing.
Posted 8/6/2008 12:33 AM by madbald - reply

Visit fairseven's Xanga Site!
Thanks for the clarification. Perhaps what was at the root of my questions was that I never put in the time to discover for myself what the scripture details about the New Jerusalem. Clearly, my questions (possibly concerns) were emanating from a general assumption about what our final home could look like.

I will say I agree with you on the vision you helped cast for what that place could look like. Admittedly, perhaps from living in and working at an urban environment, I've been far removed from the romance of God's natural beauty. Perhaps I've even strayed so far as to take things like blue skies and green earth for granted! And there's a danger in that, I'm sensing in your argument. You might be onto something there.

"People will unintentionally fall into extremes easily" -- gosh, that couldn't be more right. I'm definitely guilty of it. I guess it's for that reason that McCoy's third argument in particular was the specific one that got me shaking my head. While I understand and can hesitantly agree with your fresh perspective on McCoy's argument, my only thing was that I was shouting in a dark and abandoned room that it was not impossible to experience a retreat, or a "lonely place", even as an urban city-dweller. Consequently or not, I'm not so sure I agree just yet that the "wilderness" the Lord compels us into will necessarily evoke a similar imagery or context such as the one we find Israel or Jesus himself experiencing in the scripture. Maybe the "wilderness" could be a general experience that the Lord puts us in under the protection of his spirit that reminds us of our continuing (and quite desperate!) need for his work and presence in our life.

But I don't know. I could be wrong there. Honestly, it's another position that I need to work out from more reading and critical thinking.

Thanks again, pbang, for shedding a brighter light on some of McCoy's questionable wording. And sorry brother -- people aren't on Xanga anymore. Come over to blogspot; it's the new place to be, baby.

Quite an onslaught for "Christians" in the media today. Even though these events are just silly and almost ludicrous, I'm gonna bet some of your former students and even friends in the workplace are gonna be asked questions about these specific events this week by overzealous critical friends:

• http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-bikers7-2008aug07,0,2962846.story
• http://taxdollars.freedomblogging.com/2008/08/06/jesus-says-send-me-money/
• http://abcnews.go.com/TheLaw/story?id=5524479&page=1
Posted 8/7/2008 5:19 AM by fairseven - reply


Choose Identity
(?)
 
Give eProps (?)
Post a Comment
Add Link | Preview HTML comment help 
Profile Pic:
Default  |  Choose »  (?)



Back to madbald's Xanga Site!
Note: your comment will appear in madbald's local time zone:
GMT -05:00 (Eastern Standard - US, Canada)