REPUBLICS AND THEIR LOVES: REREADING CITY OF GOD 191
Identifieur interne : 003B24 ( Istex/Curation ); précédent : 003B23; suivant : 003B25REPUBLICS AND THEIR LOVES: REREADING CITY OF GOD 191
Auteurs : RBID : ISTEX:028C8F163601C95C21E77194244112725128DEE3Abstract
In City of God 19.24, Augustine rejects Cicero's definition of res publica as a society founded on justice for a new definition focused on common objects of love. Robert Markus, Oliver O'Donovan, and a host of Augustinian political theologians have depicted this move as a positive gesture toward secular society. Yet this reading fails to account for why Augustine waited so long to address Cicero's definition, first discussed in Book 2, and for the radical dualism Augustine sets forth between the two cities throughout his text. I argue, in line with Rowan Williams and John Milbank, for a minority reading of Book 19 that draws upon the narrative structure of City of God. In Books 3–5, Augustine recounts the history of the earthly city according to Rome's penchant for violence and idolatry, both a function of love for temporal goods. In Book 18, Augustine traces the history of the earthly city before Rome according to the same themes, completing a narrative argument that humanity has always been divided according to differing loves. Book 19 advances the idea that such idolatry is injustice—a failure to grant God the worship he is due. With the new definition of 19.24, Augustine retains Cicero's emphasis on the importance of virtue in civic society while characteristically shifting the terms of discussion from justice to love. While such a definition means that Rome can be called a res publica, it also prompts a negative judgment upon her history according to her objects of love. Given her violence and idolatry, Rome is no better than Assyria, Babylon, Egypt, and Greece—all subject to withering critique in Book 18. Thus, Augustine's new definition does not retract but extends the polemic of City of God.
Url:
DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-0025.2011.01703.x
Links toward previous steps (curation, corpus...)
- to stream Istex, to step Corpus: Pour aller vers cette notice dans l'étape Curation :003B24
Links to Exploration step
ISTEX:028C8F163601C95C21E77194244112725128DEE3Le document en format XML
<record><TEI><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title>REPUBLICS AND THEIR LOVES: REREADING CITY OF GOD 191</title><author><name sortKey="Lee, Gregory W" uniqKey="Lee G">GREGORY W. LEE</name><affiliation wicri:level="1"><mods:affiliation>Wheaton College, Department of Biblical and Theological Studies, 501 College Avenue, Wheaton, IL 60187, USA</mods:affiliation><country xml:lang="fr">États-Unis</country><wicri:regionArea>Wheaton College, Department of Biblical and Theological Studies, 501 College Avenue, Wheaton, IL 60187</wicri:regionArea></affiliation></author></titleStmt><publicationStmt><idno type="RBID">ISTEX:028C8F163601C95C21E77194244112725128DEE3</idno><date when="2011">2011</date><idno type="doi">10.1111/j.1468-0025.2011.01703.x</idno><idno type="url">https://api.istex.fr/document/028C8F163601C95C21E77194244112725128DEE3/fulltext/pdf</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Istex/Corpus">003B24</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Istex/Curation">003B24</idno></publicationStmt><seriesStmt><idno type="ISSN">0266-7177</idno></seriesStmt></fileDesc><profileDesc><textClass></textClass></profileDesc></teiHeader><front><div type="abstract" xml:lang="eng">In City of God 19.24, Augustine rejects Cicero's definition of res publica as a society founded on justice for a new definition focused on common objects of love. Robert Markus, Oliver O'Donovan, and a host of Augustinian political theologians have depicted this move as a positive gesture toward secular society. Yet this reading fails to account for why Augustine waited so long to address Cicero's definition, first discussed in Book 2, and for the radical dualism Augustine sets forth between the two cities throughout his text. I argue, in line with Rowan Williams and John Milbank, for a minority reading of Book 19 that draws upon the narrative structure of City of God. In Books 3–5, Augustine recounts the history of the earthly city according to Rome's penchant for violence and idolatry, both a function of love for temporal goods. In Book 18, Augustine traces the history of the earthly city before Rome according to the same themes, completing a narrative argument that humanity has always been divided according to differing loves. Book 19 advances the idea that such idolatry is injustice—a failure to grant God the worship he is due. With the new definition of 19.24, Augustine retains Cicero's emphasis on the importance of virtue in civic society while characteristically shifting the terms of discussion from justice to love. While such a definition means that Rome can be called a res publica, it also prompts a negative judgment upon her history according to her objects of love. Given her violence and idolatry, Rome is no better than Assyria, Babylon, Egypt, and Greece—all subject to withering critique in Book 18. Thus, Augustine's new definition does not retract but extends the polemic of City of God.</div></front></TEI><istex><corpusName>wiley</corpusName><copyrightdate>2011</copyrightdate><author><json:item><name>GREGORY W. LEE</name><affiliations><json:string>Wheaton College, Department of Biblical and Theological Studies, 501 College Avenue, Wheaton, IL 60187, USA</json:string></affiliations></json:item></author><genre><json:string>Serial article</json:string></genre><host><genre></genre><language></language><issn><json:string>0266-7177</json:string></issn><title>Modern Theology</title><doi><json:string>10.1111/(ISSN)1468-0025</json:string></doi></host><language><json:string>eng</json:string></language><abstract>In City of God 19.24, Augustine rejects Cicero's definition of res publica as a society founded on justice for a new definition focused on common objects of love. Robert Markus, Oliver O'Donovan, and a host of Augustinian political theologians have depicted this move as a positive gesture toward secular society. Yet this reading fails to account for why Augustine waited so long to address Cicero's definition, first discussed in Book 2, and for the radical dualism Augustine sets forth between the two cities throughout his text. I argue, in line with Rowan Williams and John Milbank, for a minority reading of Book 19 that draws upon the narrative structure of City of God. In Books 3–5, Augustine recounts the history of the earthly city according to Rome's penchant for violence and idolatry, both a function of love for temporal goods. In Book 18, Augustine traces the history of the earthly city before Rome according to the same themes, completing a narrative argument that humanity has always been divided according to differing loves. Book 19 advances the idea that such idolatry is injustice—a failure to grant God the worship he is due. With the new definition of 19.24, Augustine retains Cicero's emphasis on the importance of virtue in civic society while characteristically shifting the terms of discussion from justice to love. While such a definition means that Rome can be called a res publica, it also prompts a negative judgment upon her history according to her objects of love. Given her violence and idolatry, Rome is no better than Assyria, Babylon, Egypt, and Greece—all subject to withering critique in Book 18. Thus, Augustine's new definition does not retract but extends the polemic of City of God.</abstract><title>REPUBLICS AND THEIR LOVES: REREADING CITY OF GOD 191</title><pubdate>2011-10</pubdate><doi><json:string>10.1111/j.1468-0025.2011.01703.x</json:string></doi><id>028C8F163601C95C21E77194244112725128DEE3</id><fulltext><json:item><original>true</original><mimetype>application/pdf</mimetype><extension>pdf</extension><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/028C8F163601C95C21E77194244112725128DEE3/fulltext/pdf</uri></json:item><json:item><original>false</original><mimetype>application/zip</mimetype><extension>zip</extension><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/028C8F163601C95C21E77194244112725128DEE3/fulltext/zip</uri></json:item><json:item><original>false</original><mimetype>text/plain</mimetype><extension>txt</extension><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/028C8F163601C95C21E77194244112725128DEE3/fulltext/txt</uri></json:item><istex:fulltextTEI uri="https://api.istex.fr/document/028C8F163601C95C21E77194244112725128DEE3/fulltext/tei"><teiHeader type="text"><fileDesc><titleStmt><title level="a" type="alt" xml:lang="">REPUBLICS AND THEIR LOVES: REREADING CITY OF GOD 191</title></titleStmt><publicationStmt><authority>ISTEX</authority><publisher>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><pubPlace>Oxford, UK</pubPlace><availability><p>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</p></availability><date>2011-09-07</date></publicationStmt><notesStmt><note>1 I have presented versions of this argument in various contexts, including the Duke Theology and Ethics Colloquium (Oct. 7, 2008), the North American Patristics Society (May 21, 2009), and Elizabeth Clark's graduate seminar on Augustine (Nov. 17, 2009). I am grateful to Elizabeth Clark, Paul Griffiths, Stanley Hauerwas, and Geoffrey Wainwright for reading and commenting upon earlier drafts. I am also appreciative of Eric Gregory and James Wetzel for oral feedback on an earlier version.</note></notesStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct type="inbook"><analytic><title level="a" type="main" xml:lang="">REPUBLICS AND THEIR LOVES: REREADING CITY OF GOD 191</title><author><persName><forename type="first">GREGORY W.</forename><surname>LEE</surname></persName><affiliation>Wheaton College, Department of Biblical and Theological Studies, 501 College Avenue, Wheaton, IL 60187, USA</affiliation></author></analytic><monogr><title level="j">Modern Theology</title><idno type="pISSN">0266-7177</idno><idno type="eISSN">1468-0025</idno><idno type="DOI">10.1111/(ISSN)1468-0025</idno><imprint><publisher>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><pubPlace>Oxford, UK</pubPlace><date type="published" when="2011-10"></date><biblScope unit="vol">27</biblScope><biblScope unit="issue">4</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" from="553">553</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" to="581">581</biblScope></imprint></monogr><idno type="istex">028C8F163601C95C21E77194244112725128DEE3</idno><idno type="DOI">10.1111/j.1468-0025.2011.01703.x</idno><idno type="ArticleID">MOTH1703</idno></biblStruct></sourceDesc></fileDesc><profileDesc><creation><date>2011-09-07</date></creation><langUsage><language ident="en">en</language></langUsage><abstract xml:lang="en"><p>In City of God 19.24, Augustine rejects Cicero's definition of res publica as a society founded on justice for a new definition focused on common objects of love. Robert Markus, Oliver O'Donovan, and a host of Augustinian political theologians have depicted this move as a positive gesture toward secular society. Yet this reading fails to account for why Augustine waited so long to address Cicero's definition, first discussed in Book 2, and for the radical dualism Augustine sets forth between the two cities throughout his text. I argue, in line with Rowan Williams and John Milbank, for a minority reading of Book 19 that draws upon the narrative structure of City of God. In Books 3–5, Augustine recounts the history of the earthly city according to Rome's penchant for violence and idolatry, both a function of love for temporal goods. In Book 18, Augustine traces the history of the earthly city before Rome according to the same themes, completing a narrative argument that humanity has always been divided according to differing loves. Book 19 advances the idea that such idolatry is injustice—a failure to grant God the worship he is due. With the new definition of 19.24, Augustine retains Cicero's emphasis on the importance of virtue in civic society while characteristically shifting the terms of discussion from justice to love. While such a definition means that Rome can be called a res publica, it also prompts a negative judgment upon her history according to her objects of love. Given her violence and idolatry, Rome is no better than Assyria, Babylon, Egypt, and Greece—all subject to withering critique in Book 18. Thus, Augustine's new definition does not retract but extends the polemic of City of God.</p></abstract></profileDesc><revisionDesc><change when="2011-09-07">Created</change><change when="2011-10">Published</change></revisionDesc></teiHeader></istex:fulltextTEI></fulltext><metadata><istex:metadataXml wicri:clean="Wiley component found"><istex:xmlDeclaration>version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="yes"</istex:xmlDeclaration><istex:document><component version="2.0" type="serialArticle" xml:lang="en"><header><publicationMeta level="product"><publisherInfo><publisherName>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisherName><publisherLoc>Oxford, UK</publisherLoc></publisherInfo><doi origin="wiley" registered="yes">10.1111/(ISSN)1468-0025</doi><issn type="print">0266-7177</issn><issn type="electronic">1468-0025</issn><idGroup><id type="product" value="MOTH"></id><id type="publisherDivision" value="ST"></id></idGroup><titleGroup><title type="main" sort="MODERN THEOLOGY">Modern Theology</title></titleGroup></publicationMeta><publicationMeta level="part" position="10104"><doi origin="wiley">10.1111/moth.2011.27.issue-4</doi><numberingGroup><numbering type="journalVolume" number="27">27</numbering><numbering type="journalIssue" number="4">4</numbering></numberingGroup><coverDate startDate="2011-10">October 2011</coverDate></publicationMeta><publicationMeta level="unit" type="article" position="1" status="forIssue"><doi origin="wiley">10.1111/j.1468-0025.2011.01703.x</doi><idGroup><id type="unit" value="MOTH1703"></id></idGroup><countGroup><count type="pageTotal" number="29"></count></countGroup><titleGroup><title type="tocHeading1">Articles</title></titleGroup><copyright>© 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd</copyright><eventGroup><event type="xmlConverted" agent="Converter:BPG_TO_WML3G version:2.9.3 mode:FullText" date="2011-09-07"></event><event type="firstOnline" date="2011-09-07"></event><event type="publishedOnlineFinalForm" date="2011-09-07"></event><event type="xmlConverted" agent="Converter:WILEY_ML3G_TO_WILEY_ML3GV2 version:3.8.8" date="2014-02-03"></event><event type="xmlConverted" agent="Converter:WML3G_To_WML3G version:4.1.7 mode:FullText,remove_FC" date="2014-10-31"></event></eventGroup><numberingGroup><numbering type="pageFirst" number="553">553</numbering><numbering type="pageLast" number="581">581</numbering></numberingGroup><linkGroup><link type="toTypesetVersion" href="file:MOTH.MOTH1703.pdf"></link></linkGroup></publicationMeta><contentMeta><countGroup><count type="figureTotal" number="0"></count><count type="tableTotal" number="0"></count><count type="formulaTotal" number="0"></count><count type="referenceTotal" number="0"></count><count type="wordTotal" number="15395"></count><count type="linksPubMed" number="0"></count><count type="linksCrossRef" number="0"></count></countGroup><titleGroup><title type="main">REPUBLICS AND THEIR LOVES: REREADING <i>CITY OF GOD</i> 19<link href="#en1"><sup>1</sup></link></title><title type="tocForm">REPUBLICS AND THEIR LOVES: REREADING <i>CITY OF GOD</i> 19</title><title type="shortAuthors">Gregory W. Lee</title><title type="short">Republics and Their Loves</title></titleGroup><creators><creator creatorRole="author" xml:id="cr1" affiliationRef="#a1"><personName><givenNames>GREGORY W.</givenNames><familyName>LEE</familyName></personName></creator></creators><affiliationGroup><affiliation xml:id="a1" countryCode="US"><unparsedAffiliation>Wheaton College, Department of Biblical and Theological Studies, 501 College Avenue, Wheaton, IL 60187, USA</unparsedAffiliation></affiliation></affiliationGroup><abstractGroup><abstract type="main" xml:lang="en"><title type="main">Abstract</title><p>In <i>City of God</i> 19.24, Augustine rejects Cicero's definition of <i>res publica</i> as a society founded on justice for a new definition focused on common objects of love. Robert Markus, Oliver O'Donovan, and a host of Augustinian political theologians have depicted this move as a positive gesture toward secular society. Yet this reading fails to account for why Augustine waited so long to address Cicero's definition, first discussed in Book 2, and for the radical dualism Augustine sets forth between the two cities throughout his text. I argue, in line with Rowan Williams and John Milbank, for a minority reading of Book 19 that draws upon the narrative structure of <i>City of God</i>. In Books 3–5, Augustine recounts the history of the earthly city according to Rome's penchant for violence and idolatry, both a function of love for temporal goods. In Book 18, Augustine traces the history of the earthly city before Rome according to the same themes, completing a narrative argument that humanity has always been divided according to differing loves. Book 19 advances the idea that such idolatry is injustice—a failure to grant God the worship he is due. With the new definition of 19.24, Augustine retains Cicero's emphasis on the importance of virtue in civic society while characteristically shifting the terms of discussion from justice to love. While such a definition means that Rome can be called a <i>res publica</i>, it also prompts a negative judgment upon her history according to her objects of love. Given her violence and idolatry, Rome is no better than Assyria, Babylon, Egypt, and Greece—all subject to withering critique in Book 18. Thus, Augustine's new definition does not retract but extends the polemic of <i>City of God</i>.</p></abstract></abstractGroup></contentMeta><noteGroup><note xml:id="fn1"><p>Gregory W. Lee. Wheaton College, Department of Biblical and Theological Studies, 501 College Avenue, Wheaton, IL 60187, USA <email>gregory.lee@wheaton.edu</email></p></note></noteGroup></header></component></istex:document></istex:metadataXml><mods version="3.5"><titleInfo><title>REPUBLICS AND THEIR LOVES: REREADING CITY OF GOD 191</title></titleInfo><titleInfo type="abbreviated"><title>Republics and Their Loves</title></titleInfo><titleInfo type="alternative"><title>REPUBLICS AND THEIR LOVES: REREADING CITY OF GOD 191</title></titleInfo><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">GREGORY W.</namePart><namePart type="family">LEE</namePart><affiliation>Wheaton College, Department of Biblical and Theological Studies, 501 College Avenue, Wheaton, IL 60187, USA</affiliation><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><typeOfResource>text</typeOfResource><genre>Serial article</genre><originInfo><publisher>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><place><placeTerm type="text">Oxford, UK</placeTerm></place><dateCreated encoding="w3cdtf">2011-09-07</dateCreated><dateIssued encoding="w3cdtf">2011-10</dateIssued><copyrightDate encoding="w3cdtf">2011</copyrightDate></originInfo><language><languageTerm type="code" authority="iso639-2b">eng</languageTerm></language><physicalDescription><internetMediaType>text/html</internetMediaType></physicalDescription><abstract lang="eng">In City of God 19.24, Augustine rejects Cicero's definition of res publica as a society founded on justice for a new definition focused on common objects of love. Robert Markus, Oliver O'Donovan, and a host of Augustinian political theologians have depicted this move as a positive gesture toward secular society. Yet this reading fails to account for why Augustine waited so long to address Cicero's definition, first discussed in Book 2, and for the radical dualism Augustine sets forth between the two cities throughout his text. I argue, in line with Rowan Williams and John Milbank, for a minority reading of Book 19 that draws upon the narrative structure of City of God. In Books 3–5, Augustine recounts the history of the earthly city according to Rome's penchant for violence and idolatry, both a function of love for temporal goods. In Book 18, Augustine traces the history of the earthly city before Rome according to the same themes, completing a narrative argument that humanity has always been divided according to differing loves. Book 19 advances the idea that such idolatry is injustice—a failure to grant God the worship he is due. With the new definition of 19.24, Augustine retains Cicero's emphasis on the importance of virtue in civic society while characteristically shifting the terms of discussion from justice to love. While such a definition means that Rome can be called a res publica, it also prompts a negative judgment upon her history according to her objects of love. Given her violence and idolatry, Rome is no better than Assyria, Babylon, Egypt, and Greece—all subject to withering critique in Book 18. Thus, Augustine's new definition does not retract but extends the polemic of City of God.</abstract><note>1 I have presented versions of this argument in various contexts, including the Duke Theology and Ethics Colloquium (Oct. 7, 2008), the North American Patristics Society (May 21, 2009), and Elizabeth Clark's graduate seminar on Augustine (Nov. 17, 2009). I am grateful to Elizabeth Clark, Paul Griffiths, Stanley Hauerwas, and Geoffrey Wainwright for reading and commenting upon earlier drafts. I am also appreciative of Eric Gregory and James Wetzel for oral feedback on an earlier version.</note><relatedItem type="host"><titleInfo><title>Modern Theology</title></titleInfo><identifier type="ISSN">0266-7177</identifier><identifier type="eISSN">1468-0025</identifier><identifier type="DOI">10.1111/(ISSN)1468-0025</identifier><identifier type="PublisherID">MOTH</identifier><part><date>2011</date><detail type="volume"><caption>vol.</caption><number>27</number></detail><detail type="issue"><caption>no.</caption><number>4</number></detail></part></relatedItem><identifier type="istex">028C8F163601C95C21E77194244112725128DEE3</identifier><identifier type="DOI">10.1111/j.1468-0025.2011.01703.x</identifier><identifier type="ArticleID">MOTH1703</identifier><part><extent unit="pages"><start>553</start><end>581</end><total>29</total></extent><extent unit="words"><total>15395</total></extent></part><recordInfo><recordOrigin>WILEY</recordOrigin><recordContentSource>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</recordContentSource></recordInfo></mods></metadata><serie></serie></istex></record>Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)
EXPLOR_STEP=$WICRI_ROOT/Wicri/Linguistique/explor/CharterV3/Data/Istex/Curation
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_STEP/biblio.hfd -nk 003B24 | SxmlIndent | more
Ou
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Istex/Curation/biblio.hfd -nk 003B24 | SxmlIndent | more
Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri
{{Explor lien
|wiki= Wicri/Linguistique
|area= CharterV3
|flux= Istex
|étape= Curation
|type= RBID
|clé= ISTEX:028C8F163601C95C21E77194244112725128DEE3
|texte= REPUBLICS AND THEIR LOVES: REREADING CITY OF GOD 191
}}
| This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.07. |  |