This was not an easy book. It is densely written, and would require, ideally, a prior background in liberation theology. Without this, one may find oneself puzzling over unfamiliar terms and perspectives. However, it is to the credit of the author that he declares his basic approaches in the book, and seeks to provide a few basic definitions.

At the risk of over-simplifying liberation theology, this may be reduced to the statement by Gustavo Gutierrez: “The starting point of liberation theology is commitment to the poor, the ‘non-person’. Its ideas come from the victim.” (Ferguson & Wright 2005:388). In keeping with this, author Andrew Davey’s theology is “rooted in struggles of the poor”.

WHAT IS THE TROUBLE?

During the past thirty years, there has been a massive migration to the cities. As one example, a mere 20% of the population of England is now defined as “nonurban”. With the special problems which cities present, this makes it vital to develop a theology of the city. At the same time, it needs to be borne in mind that there is a continual “interdependence of the urban and rural” — not to speak of an interdependences of “a global scale”.

On the global scale, Davey considers that globalisation has engendered two great distortions. In the first place, there has been an increasing “division of rich and poor”: “While it is often assumed that globalization tends toward homogeneity, it is actually stimulated by local and regional differences”. Thus “a new geography of centrality and marginality” has emerged, the dynamics of which he describes in some detail. In the second place, valorization has been seriously skewed (he defines “valorization” as “a socially embedded dynamic that sets criteria for valuing, for pricing economic activities, outcomes, or sites”). Perhaps more importantly, there has been a false “devalorization of people, places, and activities”.

This having been said, the challenges of globalisation are not only situated in society at large. There has been a tendency within the Church itself to accept, in particular, “the dominance of suburban Christianity” at the expense of “the back alleys of society”.

WHAT SHOULD THE CHURCH DO?

Positive change, according to Davey, would seem to begin with “the imagination of God’s new order breaking in”, which “creates a place in which justice must be practiced”. “A utopian vision is needed”, he writes, for the reason that this is able “to challenge the present”, and to further enhance “awareness and control of the inevitable social transformation”. We are to “believe the future into being”.

This takes place in the context of Christian community — which in the New Testament was “a new minority community that relies on hope and faith despite the evidence to the contrary around them”. In fact he would appear to define salvation itself as one’s entry into such community — “into God’s economics (salvation)”.

Such communities seek to practice “the justice of the kingdom of God” — not only in their midst, but “universally, for everyone”. On the one hand, this means that these are communities of “justice, stewardship, and inclusion”, which seek to “’resacralize’ the spatiality and ecology of the city”. On the other hand, it implies that they will seek to carry out “key tasks [of]

evangelism”: “resistance . . . denunciation . . . critique . . . advocacy . . . and reconstruction”. While these actions will be universal in scope, they will have a preference for the “lower circuits” of the new global order.

ON WHAT BASIS SHOULD THE CHURCH ACT?

Social activism is known to be a field of great complexity and self-deception. Davey himself recognises the failures of the past. With this in mind, he quotes Ernst Bloch: “Possibility has had such bad press.” On what should one found one’s quest for a “new order”? He considers: “Praxis demands an ideological underpinning.” While his own ideology is not presented in a systematic way, one is able to follow a thread through the text.

Christians, states Davey, believe in “a bigger story of creation and its redemption”. This having been said, he would seem to give this an uncommon underpinning. The gospel represents “a retelling of the Jesus narrative” which “filters . . . individual and corporate narratives”. In short, the early Christians “claimed” aspects of the Biblical narrative in keeping with the way in which they had “glimpsed [it] in their community life”. Davey therefore states that “God’s new order is apparent to those who would perceive”. That is, our foundation would appear to lie in self-evident perception which is shared with that of the early Church.

These are profound assumptions, and many would find such epistemology unsatisfactory. Assuming that the book was intended for a wider audience, I felt that this aspect would have deserved a more thorough treatment.

SYNTHESIS

The book had, I believe, two significant weaknesses. The first is the elusive epistemology described above. The second is that, while Davey shared ways in which the Church had engaged in “actions” in the past, his “resources” for an urban future seemed to be of uncertain promise, and he seemed too often to defer to the need for “negotiation”.

Davey is an erudite man, and his thought is wide and encompassing — yet I felt that these shortcomings tended to reduce the value of the book. It could have been a strong talking point — at least considerably stronger than it is in its present form.

CITATION OF REFERENCES

Davey, Andrew 2002 Urban Christianity and Global Order: Theological Resources for an Urban Future. Peabody, Massachussetts: Hendrickson Publishers.

Ferguson, Sinclair B. & Wright, David F. (Eds.) 2005 New Dictionary of Theology. Leicester, England: Inter-Varsity Press.

Reviewed by Thomas Scarborough. Thomas Scarborough is a Congregational minister in central Cape Town. This book served as required reading in fulfilment of an MA degree at Fuller Theological Seminary.