Book Review - Center Church: Doing Balanced, Gospel-Centered Ministry in Your City
[amazon 0310494184 thumbnail]
I saw a slight criticism of Tim Keller’s book Center Church about a month after it was released this September, but there was no way that the critic could have read the entire book so fast! The criticism got my attention and after reading what Keller had to say about his own book, I decided to buy it and check it out. I had my doubts after having read a few comments from people who voiced their reservations about Keller’s direction. So, I want to lay out a report of what the book is about and what some of the key thoughts are that drive the direction of this book.
1. The Gospel
The first and most important issue that Keller addresses is the gospel, it’s content and it’s exclusivity. He also makes it clear that incarnational gospel living isn’t enough, words are necessary! It must be preached verbally. The gospel is a story that begins with creation and ends in the consummation. Different parts of the plot line of the story of the gospel are better starting points to share with unbelievers than others depending on the culture. There is no “one size fits all” presentation of the gospel that fits in every time and place. Neither is the gospel just a hoop we jump through to get converted:
It is inaccurate to think the gospel is what saves non-Christians and then Christians mature by trying hard to live according to biblical principles. It is more accurate to say that we are saved by believing the gospel, and then we are transformed in every part of our minds, hearts, and lives by believing the gospel more and more deeply as life goes on…. (p. 48)
As the gospel is understood more by believers, it will have an affect on every detail of their lives so that their lives become shaped by the gospel and it’s implications. This will lead to a gospel renewal individually and corporately. To my surprise, chapter 4 deals with the subject of revival and revivalism. This really grabbed my attention because I just spent the better part of this year digging into the past to learn about the great movements of the Holy Spirit. It was refreshing to read how we need to first begin with gospel renewal and the Holy Spirit’s power. He affirmed what Alexander, Nevin, and other Second Great Awakening “Old Schoolers” believed:
A commitment to corporate and individual gospel renewal through the ordinary means of grace - is the work of the church…Revivalist ministry emphasizes conversion and spiritual renewal, not only for those outside the church but also for those inside the church (p. 60) …to kindle every revival, the Holy Spirit initially uses what Edwards called “extraordinary prayer” - united, persistent and kingdom centered (p. 73) …revivals occur mainly through the “instituted means of grace”—preaching, pastoring, worship, and prayer. It is extremely important to reaffirm this. (p. 76)
As we pray and prepare for gospel renewal/revival in our church, we must preach the gospel to Christians and non-Christians alike. You can’t assume that everyone under your voice is a believer. So, although the worship service is designed specificially for believers, we must be sensitive to the fact that unbelievers will be present and what we say needs to be directed at them too.
2. The City
The next part of the book, deals with the importance of the city and how to bring the gospel to it. This is the section on contextualization. At the beginning of chapter 7, Keller acknowledges all the baggage that this word has from its origins in the World Council of Churches. He explains how mainline denominational liberalism forsook the authority of Scripture to define it’s mission and turned to see what the culture was doing as if it was God at work through it. The church then had to find out what God was doing and get on that mission—human rights, emancipation of slaves, women’s rights, civil rights and now gay rights. Keller counters:
Contextualization is not—as it is often argued—“giving people what they want to hear.” Rather, it is giving people the Bible’s answers, which they may not at all want to hear, to questions about life that people in their particular time and place are asking, in language and forms they can comprehend, and through appeals and arguments with force they can feel, even if they reject them.
Sound contextualization means translating and adapting the communication and ministry of the gospel to the particular culture without compromising the essence and particulars of the gospel itself. …we show people how the baseline “cultural narratives” of their society and the hopes of their hearts can only find resolution and fulfillment in Jesus. What do I mean by this? Some cultures are pragmatic and prod their members to acquire possessions and power. Some are individualistic and urge their members to seek personal freedom above all. Others are “honor and shame” cultures with emphasis on respect, reputation, duty and bringing honor to your family. Some cultures are discursive and put the highest value on art, philosophy, and learning. These are called “cultural narratives” because they are stories that a people tell about themselves and make sense out of their shared existence. But whatever [the story] may be, sound contextualization shows people how the plotlines of the stories of their lives can only find a happy ending in Christ. (p. 89-90)
To do this kind of contextualization correctly, we must find out what parts of God’s naturally revealed truth the culture rejects and what parts it accepts. Because of common grace and the image of God stamped into every person, there are parts of God’s truth that are readily accepted and others that are offensive. To engage these people well, we must affirm and begin with the “A” doctrines that they already accept and show them how they are inconsistent for not accepting the “B” doctrines that they reject. This approach as Keller explained it, had a distinct Van Tillian apologetic flavor which resonated with me. The only way to know what questions and values these people have is to immerse yourself in their questions, hopes, fears and beliefs so you can give a biblical, gospel-centered response to their questions.
In the next chapters (11-14), he writes about the importance of Christians to do ministries in cultural centers called cities.
The city is humanity intensified—a magnifying glass that brings out the very best and worst of human nature (p. 135) … Cities, quite literally, have more of the image of God per square inch than any other place on earth. How can we not be drawn to such masses of humanity if we care about the same things that God cares about? (p. 141)
Rather than Christians leaving the cities as they get more corrupt and moving to the suburbs where other good people like themselves are living, he encourages us to be salt and light in the cities. The only way to reach the world is through the city and you can’t reach the city through the suburb, but you can reach the suburb from the city. This was Paul’s strategy in going to large cultural centers where he started churches. People are moving in and out of cities and contributing their talents to art, technology and ideas that shape the greater culture. Why shouldn’t Christians be in the very center of this, contributing what they have to offer in a gospel-shaped, distinctive way? They can do so by showing the world around them what its like to be in the kingdom of God under the Lordship of Christ and make an impact.
This brings up the question of how to engage the culture. Everyone has different philosophies about how to go about it. There are basically four models in which any of us can find ourselves:
Relevance - These are the churches that rely heavily on common grace more than revealed truth and are very active in trying to adapt to the culture. Examples include the liberal mainline denominations, emerging church and seeker sensitive churches.
Transformationist - These are people who believe in theonomy, Christian re-constructionism and the political religious right. They think that the way to engage the culture is to shape the government and cultural institutions into a distinctly Christian worldview. They are also very active, especially in politics.
Counterculturalist - These are the separatists who believe in withdrawing from the culture altogether and forming their own subculture as a distinct separate society that the world can witness as different. The people who would be included in this group would be the Amish, Mennonites, neo-monastics and fundamentalists.
(Note: Keller never mentions that fundamentalists belong in this category, but since he fails to mention it, I will. I put them here because they seem to fit somewhere between this category and the Transformationist category, since many Fundamentalists are active members of the political religious right as well.)
Two Kingdoms - This view is Augustinian in its origins and holds that the “City of God and City of Man” are coexisting together. Believers are citizens of both cities, but hold their allegiance to the City of God and do what they can to shape the City of Man with the values of the City of God. The Reformed traditions and Lutherans would belong to this category. Most Dispensationalists would not find themselves here since they don’t believe there’s a Kingdom of God until the second coming. There is very little room for the “already, but not yet” paradigm. Although Keller does offer a few criticisms of the Two Kingdoms view, he seems to favor it a little more than the others.
To be a “Center Church”, Keller explains, one must shoot for the right balance of all four views simultaneously. We do need to appreciate the common grace that the unbelievers enjoy, even as we seek to transform the culture into one that is governed by a Christian worldview. At the same time, we do need to be a separate people who are a distinct community under the Lordship of Christ that the world sees as an attractive alternative and realize that we are members of two kingdoms until the Kingdom of God comes in its fullest form to engulf the kingdom of man.
3. Movement
Finally, at the end of the book the last chapters are dedicated to the church being both an organism and an organization that has static and dynamic elements. The church is both a stable institution with inherited traditions and a dynamic movement of the Holy Spirit. We minister with balance, rooted in our ecclesial tradition, yet working cooperatively with the body of Christ to reach our city with the gospel.
In this section, Keller lays out what he defines as the Missional Church. He also talks about the history of the term Missio Dei and all of the liberal baggage that comes with it, but he explains how a guy named Lesslie Newbigin broke away from the more liberal World Council of Churches to redefine “Missional” as something that encapsulates both aspects of social justice and evangelism (incarnational and evangelistic).
Keller clearly plants his flag in the “Missional Church Movement”. There has been such a cultural shift in our society that the old culture of “Christendom” is gone forever. Christendom was the West’s Christianized culture that has reigned since the middle ages, but today we are in a neo-pagan culture in which the assumptions that believer and non-believer alike once held in common are no longer there.
Every part of a church’s life—its worship, community, public discourse, preaching and education—has to assume the presence of non-believers from the surrounding culture. The aesthetics of its worship have to reflect the sensibilities of the culture and yet show how Christian belief shapes and is expressed through them… A missional church is not less than an evangelistic church, but it is much more. (p. 264-265)
This last paragraph is exactly what missionaries do when they start a church in another country with another culture. Their churches, dress, music, etc., are familiar to the surrounding culture without adapting to the evil parts of that culture.
Keller gives the marks of a missional church:
1. A missional church, if it is to have a missionary encounter with Western culture, will need to confront societies idols and especially address how modernity makes the happiness and self actualization of the individual into an absolute. [Materialism,] consumerism and greed… lead to injustice. [The doctrine of the atonement and justification] provide… [a] basis and… internal motivation to live more simply and do justice in the world. (p. 271)
2. A missional church, if it is to reach people in the post-Christian culture, must recognize that most of our more recently formulated and popular gospel presentations will fall on deaf ears because hearers will be viscerally offended or simply unable to understand the basic concepts of God, sin and redemption. …Christian communicators must now enter, challenge and retell the culture’s stories with the gospel. (p. 272)
3. A missional church will affirm that all Christians are people in mission in every area of their lives. We must overcome the clericalism and lay passivity of the Christendom era and recover the Reformation doctrine of “the priesthood of all believers.” (p. 272)
4. The missional church must understand itself as a servant community—a counterculture for the common good…. [Churches used to be able to] limit themselves to specifically “religious” concerns and function as loose fellowships within a wider semi-Christian culture… [W]hile the Christian church must be distinct, it must be set within, not be separated from, its surroundings. Its neighbors must see it as a servant society, sacrificially pouring out its time and wealth for the common good of the city… [This] will show the world… [a] way between the individualistic self-absorption that secularism can breed and the tribal self-righteousness that religion can breed. (p. 274)
We must take these values and teach our people to live them out as informal missionaries in the world if we are going to have an impact and bring the gospel to them. We will have an impact for the gospel if we are like those around us yet profoundly different and unlike them at the same time, all the while remaining very visible and engaged. Christians must be like their neighbors in the food they eat, the clothes they wear, their dialect, general appearance, work life, recreational, cultural activities and civil engagement doing all things with excellence. But Christians need to be unlike their neighbors by being scrupulously honest, transparent, fair and generous. Evangelism is not simply information transmission, it’s pouring our lives into others with the gospel. The church’s objective is to connect people to God, connect people to one another, connect people to the city and connect people to the culture so that they will think “Christianly” about life. Christianity is more than a set of beliefs that achieve salvation for the soul, it is also a distinct way of understanding and interpreting everything in the world. We want Christians to be growing in maturity, working in their vocations with both excellence and Christian distinctiveness, seasoning and benefiting the culture in which they live.
At the end, he encourages churches to engage in church planting in cities as the best way to get the gospel to more unbelievers and the best way to revitalize dying established churches. If a city population can get to at least 10% Christian population, it can make a huge difference in the morals and the cultural expressions of that city.
Evaluation
Overall, this book resonated with me and gave me the clearest vision for ministry that I have ever read in one volume, since reading 9 Marks of a Healthy Church. I was greatly encouraged by this book and would recommend any pastor to consider what Tim Keller has to say. There may be some philosophical differences on some points, but for the most part, I believe he sets a good direction for churches to follow into the future.
About the Author
Timothy Keller is the founder and senior pastor of Redeemer Presbyterian Church in New York City, and the New York Times bestselling author of The Reason for God and The Prodigal God. He has also mentored young urban church planters and pastors in New York and other cities through Redeemer City to City, which has helped launch over 200 churches in 35 global cities to date.
William Dudding Bio
William Dudding is one of the pastors at Mission Peak Baptist Church in Fremont, California. He also blogs at The Reforming Baptist. William graduated from Golden State Baptist College in 2000.
- 197 views
This was a great book……and I need to get my review done as well:)
The assertion that Christians generally fall into 4 camps misses a big group who engage the culture and politics but in their contexts.
It is inaccurate to think the gospel is what saves non-Christians and then Christians mature by trying hard to live according to biblical principles. It is more accurate to say that we are saved by believing the gospel, and then we are transformed in every part of our minds, hearts, and lives by believing the gospel more and more deeply as life goes on…. (p. 48)
I’ll take Psalm 119 and 2 Timothy 3:16-17 over that any day.
"The Midrash Detective"
Ed,
You guys who think that your own strict adherence to the Bible is what makes you right with God don’t get the gospel and how it informs your life beyond just getting a ticket to heaven. The rest of the Bible makes more sense and is “obeyable” when you’re motivated by the gospel.
Keller may be off on his Presbyterianism, but he isn’t off on this point.
Alex would like an IFB-KJVO review of the book since I’m too similar to Keller in theology. Here ya go, from the old me:
First, Keller is way too ecumenical. He talks way too much about cooperating with others to bring about gospel movement in the city. That’s wrong. The best way to bring gospel distinctiveness is separation. His universal church theology informs his idea of cooperating with other churches. There is no universal church. Just the local church.
Second, he’s a compromiser because he thinks you should use the kind of music in your services that is “comprehendible” to outsiders yet making it distinctly Christian. He uses Classical and Jazz because New Yorkers appreciate those genre’s of music and see it as high culture. This is obviously capitulating to the culture’s unredeemed flesh. Doesn’t he know where jazz came from 100 years ago? (Yes, and it doesn’t have the same connotations today, but that doesn’t matter).
Because Keller isn’t a Dispensationalist, he doesn’t understand that the whole world is going to burn up anyway, so why bother doing social justice? Didn’t Jesus say that the poor you will have with you always? If the poor will always be with us, then why bother helping people get out of poverty? All people need are soul winners to knock on their doors to tell them how to go to heaven. All this social justice stuff is just a post-millennial pie in the sky pipe dream.
[WilliamD]Ed,
You guys who think that your own strict adherence to the Bible is what makes you right with God don’t get the gospel and how it informs your life beyond just getting a ticket to heaven. The rest of the Bible makes more sense and is “obeyable” when you’re motivated by the gospel.
Keller may be off on his Presbyterianism, but he isn’t off on this point.
Us guys believe that at regeneration we are renewed and empowered by the Holy Spirit to walk in the Spirit. The idea that adherence to the Bible makes us right with God is heresy. I certainly don’t believe that; I do not know anyone on SI that believes that. We believe we are made right with God by faith in Jesus Christ alone (as understood via I Cor. 15:1-5), although the desire to be made right with God (repentance) is understood. The word “Gospel” is used 93 times in the Bible; the way the Keller camp uses it, you would think it was used 99,993 times.
Galatians 3:3-5 reads:
Are you so foolish? Having begun by the Spirit, are you now being perfected by the flesh? 4 Did you suffer so many things in vain—if indeed it was in vain? 5 Does he who supplies the Spirit to you and works miracles among you do so by works of the law, or by hearing with faith— 6 just as Abraham “believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness”?
It is by faith in the power of the Spirit that we live the Christian life. That faith rests in the Gospel for salvation, but it is ultimately in God Himself. That faith is increased as we study and hear the Word, not just the Gospel, but the whole counsel of God. To take a part (the Gospel) and to make it the whole is a logical error. The Gospel may be the most important part of God’s Word, but it is not the whole. It may be the entry point and must constantly be appreciated (as in communion, for example), but we do need the entire counsel of God, much of which is only indirectly connected to the Gospel message itself.
John 17:17
Sanctify them in the truth; Your word is truth.
Substituting a part for the whole is just wrong. Our Bibles would be a lot thinner if all we needed were the Gospel
"The Midrash Detective"
The Gospel may be the most important part of God’s Word, but it is not the whole.
Well Ed, it sounds like you agree with Tim Keller. He has three whole chapters on this called:
The Gospel is not Everything
The Gospel is not a Simple Thing
The Gospel Affects Everything
Why don’t you read the book for yourself?
Kudos William D. for doing this review on Center City Church. I think now that there is some back and forth discussion, those who have commented here hopefully are realizing that surface assumptions about this book and about each other’s theology were off base. For instance, its really hard to group Ed and Alex together because they really do think quite differently on certain issues. At the same time, Keller, in 3 chapters of this book, does embrace both gospel-centered sanctification/ministry and the entire counsel of God. So the 93 times vs. 99,993 times comparison is unfair.
Although I believe this review gave a very good overview of the book, at the same time, I was surprised that this review wasn’t covered in 3 parts, because there is so much to dissect, especially since the book is 400 pages with extremely small print. Each part (gospel, city/culture, and movement/missional) needs more thorough dissection because the audience here on Sharper Iron has had many spirited discussions in the past few years on these same subjects: the gospel, culture, and the missional movement.
Hopefully the conversation will continue
Thanks Joel, that’s true. Surface assumptions are out of place.
Also, I originally wrote the review for the leaders in my church to check out before we read it together. If I had known that it would be on Sharperiron, then a three part series would have been a great consideration. It is a huge book with much more than I could have possibly written in one post.
Though Keller is not beyond critique, having read the book I will say that it would be hard to bring out negative aspects of the book simply because Keller is so adept at being so thorough and balanced (I hate using this word because it gets abused to the point of uselessness). He draws upon every side of almost every issue he addresses pointing out the good/bad - helpful/unhelpful - gets the point/misses the point.
For example, in chapter 16 Keller discusses the main cultural responses to the church. He lays out the views and critiques all of them bringing out the good and bad. In my mind he is a great model of fairness and balance. One are where some more conservative theologians will most likely disagree with Keller is the section where he deals with the various views of the atonement (pp.130-31). Keller sees truth in all of the views though he sees the theme of substitution as most central and without which there is not atonement.
Again, Keller is so nuanced and careful in his argumentation that it will be hard to find fault (I will leave that up to the experts in the field). Keller is a master practitioner and is able to articulate his integration of theology and practice in a way I can only dream of.
[WilliamD]The Gospel may be the most important part of God’s Word, but it is not the whole.
Well Ed, it sounds like you agree with Tim Keller. He has three whole chapters on this called:
The Gospel is not Everything
The Gospel is not a Simple Thing
The Gospel Affects Everything
Why don’t you read the book for yourself?
I am not saying that Keller has nothing good to say. But I am disagreeing vehemently with your comment which I think misses the mark:
You guys who think that your own strict adherence to the Bible is what makes you right with God don’t get the gospel and how it informs your life beyond just getting a ticket to heaven. The rest of the Bible makes more sense and is “obeyable” when you’re motivated by the gospel.
If Keller says the same as I said above, then why do you criticize me (‘you guys”) for disagreeing with Keller on this? If I am disagreeing with Keller, then how can you say I agree with him?
I quoted from the review what I disagreed with Keller about:
It is more accurate to say that we are saved by believing the gospel, and then we are transformed in every part of our minds, hearts, and lives by believing the gospel more and more deeply as life goes on…. (p. 48)
I know of no verse that says believing the Gospel MORE transforms every part of our minds, hearts, and lives. You either believe the Gospel or you do not. Perhaps I have overlooked a passage and will stand corrected. Growth in Scripture for the Christian, in my understanding, does not come from only one avenue: it is said to result from faith in God and the empowerment of the Spirit, trials God sends your way, the renewed mind (presumably in the Word which is what transforms your mind), prayer, the edification coming from those within the Body, etc.
I am commenting on a review of the book, I know, and not the book. I suppose my beef is not with a book, but a trend.
"The Midrash Detective"
[Ed Vasicek]It is inaccurate to think the gospel is what saves non-Christians and then Christians mature by trying hard to live according to biblical principles. It is more accurate to say that we are saved by believing the gospel, and then we are transformed in every part of our minds, hearts, and lives by believing the gospel more and more deeply as life goes on…. (p. 48)
I’ll take Psalm 119 and 2 Timothy 3:16-17 over that any day.
If the stress is on, “The gospel is something you never leave behind,” and if the gospel is being contrasted to “trying hard,” you may be over-exegeting the contrast in what Keller is saying. As touching the content of what guides us to live biblically, there’s nothing other than the whole counsel of God; as what lets us actually execute, it is certainly the transformation of the gospel that moved that law from the written page onto our hearts.
Michael Osborne
Philadelphia, PA
M. Osborne, I am with you. But I would add that we are transformed even more (after regeneration) by renewing our minds. Romans 12:2 does not say how we renew our minds, I understand it to refer to Psalm 1-like meditation on the Word and I Peter 2:2 craving the milk of the Word to grow.
Contemplating the Gospel is part of that renewal (for a good portion of the Bible is about the good news), but so is includes all of Scripture. This may sound like straining at gnats, but it is amazingly crucial. The difference between developing an ethic and lifestyle based upon the whole of Scripture looks different from doing this with part. Also, if you over-emphasize the Gospel —which is certainly of first importance (yes, I believe that is possible), you end up eclipsing the rest of the Word.
"The Midrash Detective"
I know of no verse that says believing the Gospel MORE transforms every part of our minds, hearts, and lives. You either believe the Gospel or you do not. Perhaps I have overlooked a passage and will stand corrected.
Ok, you’re mixing up implication with command. Just because there isn’t a verse that says: “Believe the gospel more” doesn’t mean that the concept isn’t true. Paul says the same thing in other terms such as:
Romans 6:11 Likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord.
If they’re born again, then they already did this when they believed the gospel to be saved. They chose life in Christ over death in sin. Yet, Paul still tells Christians: “consider this true for yourself!” in other words…”believe this aspect of the gospel!”
“You either believe the Gospel or you do not” is very simplistic. You either believe in God’s omniscience or you don’t! Well, in the moments that I sin, at that moment, I am not really believing in God’s omniscience because if I really did, I would fear his gaze on my willful rebellion. I believe in God’s omniscience and can get that doctrine right on a theology exam, but in real life when I actually sin, I’m not believing. Keller is essentially saying the same thing. Christians live like they don’t believe the gospel all the time.
Okay, I understand what you are saying. I just think this is broadening the Biblical meaning of the word “gospel.”
"The Midrash Detective"
Discussion