4. A religious base. The fourth characteristic of Nehemiah’s effort to revitalize Jerusalem was that he had a religious base. The chapter begins with an account of how one in ten Jewish lay persons was chosen to relocate, but little is said about them. The bulk of the chapter (and the next chapter) detail the families of priests, Levites and other religious leaders who settled in the city. The emphasis is there.
Why? Obviously because Nehemiah knew, as we also should know, that a community holds together only by some higher allegiance or priority and that the only truly adequate base for real brotherhood or community among people is devotion to God. Without this the people soon become little more than competing or warring factions. Barber puts it well:
A strong religious commitment is essential if a democratic form of administration is to succeed. Without adequate spiritual values it is hard, if not impossible, to retain the idea of obligation and responsibility. Individualism cannot long be held in check by the concept of a calling embodying good works and self-restraint. When this control is weakened, legislation takes the place of spiritual convictions and becomes the foundation of the community. And with the increase in legislation there is a corresponding increase in bureaucracy with a minimizing of efficiency and a diminution of personal worth.1
Jerusalem had a religious base. Therefore, the cohesion and efficiency of the people as well as a strong sense of personal worth were high.
But enough of Nehemiah’s plan. I said at the beginning that we also must populate our cities Christianly. How shall we do this? What should be our plan? I suggest that what we need to establish in our cities are models of Christian community. This goal should have the following essential elements.
1. We must live in the cities. Not every Christian needs to live in our cities, but far more should live in them than do. How many? It is hard to say. In Nehemiah’s day, in which the economy was largely agricultural, the figure was one in ten, plus others who lived in the cities round about. In America in our day, where the economy is industrial and service based rather than agricultural, fifty percent of the general population live in cities. That suggests that at least fifty percent of the Christian population should also. But since this percentage is going up—estimates of 90 percent by the year 2000, only a decade away—and since we want to be ahead of the times rather than lagging behind them, we should probably lead the way with an even higher percentage of evangelicals relocating to the urban areas.
Our goal should be a Christian presence in each block of each major city. My model for this is that of E. V. Hill, pastor of the Mount Zion Missionary Baptist Church of Los Angeles. Hill is one of the great urban leaders of our time. Before he entered the Christian ministry he lived in Texas where he was a ward leader for the Democratic party. His assignment was to get out the vote for Democratic candidates, and his chief strategy for doing this was to have a block captain for each block of his ward. On election days the block captains were to contact each resident of their blocks to make sure they voted. When Hill came to Los Angeles he asked himself why he should not do that for the kingdom of God, if he had done it for the Democrats. Why not have a Christian block captain for every block of Los Angeles?
It is not so absurd as you might think. How many blocks do you suppose are in the city of Los Angeles? The answer is about 9000. In E. V. Hill’s area of the city, south central Los Angeles, the number is 3100. That is what Pastor Hill’s church tackled. By the time I first heard him tell about this goal the church had already established a Christian presence in 1900 blocks of their area.
The same magnitude of statistics should prevail for the residential areas of most other U.S. cities.
Would such an effort be felt? It would.
1Cyril J. Barber, Nehemiah and the Dynamics of Effective Leadership (Neptune, NJ: Loizeaux Brothers, 1976), 155.
