“Le devoir des époux”

Chris L. de Wet
{"title":"“Le devoir des époux”","authors":"Chris L. de Wet","doi":"10.1163/15743012-bja10003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n The purpose of this article is to examine and evaluate Michel Foucault’s use of John Chrysostom’s (c. 349–407 CE) views on marriage and sexuality, as it is expounded in Foucault’s fourth volume of Histoire de la sexualité, Les aveux de la chair (2018). The following question is asked: does Foucault have anything new and relevant to say to current scholarship of John Chrysostom, especially in terms of his views about sexuality and marriage? The article brings Foucault’s contribution into dialogue with more or less current scholarship of Chrysostom. The study first examines the sources Foucault used for Chrysostom, and then critically delineates and assesses Foucault’s argument regarding marriage in John Chrysostom. In the analysis of Foucault’s reading of Chrysostom’s marital ethic, attention is given to three central aspects present in the chapter, “Le devoir des époux” (“The Duty of the Spouses”). First, the links Foucault establishes between the micro-politics of sexuality (and the domus or private life) and the macro-politics of the Christian Empire is discussed. Second, it is asked how Foucault reconstructs Chrysostom’s marital ethic as a type of technē for the married life, including how Foucault attempts to deconstruct the dichotomy between marriage and virginity. Finally, the study analyses how Foucault interprets Chrysostom’s view of the conjugal relationship as one based on the rights of property ownership and debt.","PeriodicalId":41841,"journal":{"name":"Religion and Theology-A Journal of Contemporary Religious Discourse","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2020-07-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Religion and Theology-A Journal of Contemporary Religious Discourse","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15743012-bja10003","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"RELIGION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

The purpose of this article is to examine and evaluate Michel Foucault’s use of John Chrysostom’s (c. 349–407 CE) views on marriage and sexuality, as it is expounded in Foucault’s fourth volume of Histoire de la sexualité, Les aveux de la chair (2018). The following question is asked: does Foucault have anything new and relevant to say to current scholarship of John Chrysostom, especially in terms of his views about sexuality and marriage? The article brings Foucault’s contribution into dialogue with more or less current scholarship of Chrysostom. The study first examines the sources Foucault used for Chrysostom, and then critically delineates and assesses Foucault’s argument regarding marriage in John Chrysostom. In the analysis of Foucault’s reading of Chrysostom’s marital ethic, attention is given to three central aspects present in the chapter, “Le devoir des époux” (“The Duty of the Spouses”). First, the links Foucault establishes between the micro-politics of sexuality (and the domus or private life) and the macro-politics of the Christian Empire is discussed. Second, it is asked how Foucault reconstructs Chrysostom’s marital ethic as a type of technē for the married life, including how Foucault attempts to deconstruct the dichotomy between marriage and virginity. Finally, the study analyses how Foucault interprets Chrysostom’s view of the conjugal relationship as one based on the rights of property ownership and debt.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
“丈夫的责任”
本文的目的是研究和评估米歇尔·福柯对约翰·克里索斯托姆(约349-407 CE)关于婚姻和性的观点的运用,正如福柯在《性行为史》第四卷《椅子之路》(2018)中所阐述的那样。下面的问题被问到:福柯是否有什么新的和相关的观点可以对当前的金口约翰的学术研究说,特别是他关于性和婚姻的观点?这篇文章将福柯的贡献与当前的金口学者或多或少地进行了对话。本研究首先考察了福柯在《金口颂》中使用的资料来源,然后批判性地描述和评估了福柯在《金口颂》中关于婚姻的观点。在分析福柯对金口斯托婚姻伦理的解读时,重点关注“配偶的义务”一章中的三个核心方面。首先,讨论了福柯在性的微观政治(以及家庭或私人生活)和基督教帝国的宏观政治之间建立的联系。其次,问福柯如何重建金口的婚姻伦理作为一种技术的婚姻生活,包括福柯如何试图解构婚姻和贞操之间的二分法。最后,本研究分析了福柯是如何将金索斯托姆的婚姻关系观点解释为一种基于财产所有权和债务权利的婚姻关系。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
11
期刊最新文献
The Salvific City Under Caesar’s Sword Pondering Tibetan Buddhist Alterity in Peter Dickinson’s Tulku Mani and Augustine: Collected Essays on Mani, Manichaeism and Augustine , by Johannes van Oort “God” in Augustine’s Confessions
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1