What's good for the Goose...

In a recent history book I'm reading on the global history of the concept of the City, Joel Kotkin complains that Christianity had an "antiurban perspective." (37) He argues that Jesus himself was a homeless nomad and had no use for the urban centers of society. He states that the principal concern of Christians was "faith in a single, transcendent god." (36) Fair enough. I think Kotkin is missing the bigger picture by ignoring the fact that up until 315 AD, Christianity was a persecuted religion throughout the Roman empire and had to hide to exist. I think antiurban is hardly the term I would use to describe Christianity after Constantine.

The problem for me is that a few pages later, when discussing Islam's development, Kotkin praises Islam for being an "profoundly urban faith." (44) Kotkin asserts that the "need to gather the community of believers was a critical aspect of Islam....Islam virtually demanded cities to serve as 'the places where men pray together.'" (44) Just two pages later, however, Kotkin argues that Islam fosters "a sophisticated urban culture" while managing to not worship the city for its own sake. The city becomes a vehicle for "the integration of the daily lives of men with a transcendent God." (46)

So somehow, Christianity's emphasis, as Kotkin sees it, on a transcendent deity is antiurban while Islam fosters "a sophisticated urban culture" by having an emphasis on "the integration of the daily lives of men with a transcendent God." (46)

Go figure...

*Quotes are from Joel Kotkin, The City: A Global History (New York: Random House, 2005).

FCS Welcome message from Dr. Grant