MODERN SOVEREIGNTY IN QUESTION: THEOLOGY, DEMOCRACY AND CAPITALISM
Identifieur interne : 000A44 ( Istex/Corpus ); précédent : 000A43; suivant : 000A45MODERN SOVEREIGNTY IN QUESTION: THEOLOGY, DEMOCRACY AND CAPITALISM
Auteurs : Adrian PabstSource :
- Modern Theology [ 0266-7177 ] ; 2010-10.
Abstract
This essay argues that modern sovereignty is not simply a legal or political concept that is coterminous with the modern nation‐state. Rather, at the theoretical level modern sovereign power is inscribed into a wider theological dialectic between “the one” and “the many”. Modernity fuses juridical‐constitutional models of supreme state authority with a new, “biopolitical” account of power whereby natural life and the living body of the individual are the object of politics and are subject to state control (section 1). The origins of this dialectic go back to changes within Christian theology in the late Middle Ages and the early modern period. In particular, these changes can be traced to Ockham's denial of the universal Good in things, Suárez's priority of the political community over the ecclesial body and Hobbes's “biopolitical” definition of power as state dominion over life (section 2). At the practical level, modern sovereignty has involved both the national state and the transnational market. The “revolutions in sovereignty” that gave rise to the modern state and the modern market were to some considerable extent shaped by theological concepts and changes in religious institutions and practices: first, the supremacy of the modern national state over the transnational papacy and national churches; second, the increasing priority of individuality over collectivity; third, a growing focus on contractual proprietary relations at the expense of covenantal ties and communal bonds (section 3). By subjecting both people and property to uniform standards of formal natural rights and abstract monetary value, financial capitalism and liberal secular democracy are part of the “biopolitical” logic that subordinates the sanctity of life and land to the secular sacrality of the state and the market. In Pope Benedict's theology, we can find the contours of a post‐secular political economy that challenges the monopoly of modern sovereignty (sections 4–5).
Url:
DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-0025.2010.01633.x
Links to Exploration step
ISTEX:CE3394C7D3369888B6346A2FEE8F5E69056B2A59Le document en format XML
<record><TEI wicri:istexFullTextTei="biblStruct"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title xml:lang="en">MODERN SOVEREIGNTY IN QUESTION: THEOLOGY, DEMOCRACY AND CAPITALISM</title><author><name sortKey="Pabst, Adrian" sort="Pabst, Adrian" uniqKey="Pabst A" first="Adrian" last="Pabst">Adrian Pabst</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>University of Kent, Politics and International Relations, Rutherford College Canterbury, CT2 7NX, UKA.Pabst@kent.ac.uk</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author></titleStmt><publicationStmt><idno type="wicri:source">ISTEX</idno><idno type="RBID">ISTEX:CE3394C7D3369888B6346A2FEE8F5E69056B2A59</idno><date when="2010" year="2010">2010</date><idno type="doi">10.1111/j.1468-0025.2010.01633.x</idno><idno type="url">https://api.istex.fr/document/CE3394C7D3369888B6346A2FEE8F5E69056B2A59/fulltext/pdf</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Istex/Corpus">000A44</idno></publicationStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct><analytic><title level="a" type="main" xml:lang="en">MODERN SOVEREIGNTY IN QUESTION: THEOLOGY, DEMOCRACY AND CAPITALISM</title><author><name sortKey="Pabst, Adrian" sort="Pabst, Adrian" uniqKey="Pabst A" first="Adrian" last="Pabst">Adrian Pabst</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>University of Kent, Politics and International Relations, Rutherford College Canterbury, CT2 7NX, UKA.Pabst@kent.ac.uk</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author></analytic><monogr></monogr><series><title level="j">Modern Theology</title><idno type="ISSN">0266-7177</idno><idno type="eISSN">1468-0025</idno><imprint><publisher>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><pubPlace>Oxford, UK</pubPlace><date type="published" when="2010-10">2010-10</date><biblScope unit="volume">26</biblScope><biblScope unit="issue">4</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" from="570">570</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" to="602">602</biblScope></imprint><idno type="ISSN">0266-7177</idno></series><idno type="istex">CE3394C7D3369888B6346A2FEE8F5E69056B2A59</idno><idno type="DOI">10.1111/j.1468-0025.2010.01633.x</idno><idno type="ArticleID">MOTH1633</idno></biblStruct></sourceDesc><seriesStmt><idno type="ISSN">0266-7177</idno></seriesStmt></fileDesc><profileDesc><textClass></textClass><langUsage><language ident="en">en</language></langUsage></profileDesc></teiHeader><front><div type="abstract" xml:lang="en">This essay argues that modern sovereignty is not simply a legal or political concept that is coterminous with the modern nation‐state. Rather, at the theoretical level modern sovereign power is inscribed into a wider theological dialectic between “the one” and “the many”. Modernity fuses juridical‐constitutional models of supreme state authority with a new, “biopolitical” account of power whereby natural life and the living body of the individual are the object of politics and are subject to state control (section 1). The origins of this dialectic go back to changes within Christian theology in the late Middle Ages and the early modern period. In particular, these changes can be traced to Ockham's denial of the universal Good in things, Suárez's priority of the political community over the ecclesial body and Hobbes's “biopolitical” definition of power as state dominion over life (section 2). At the practical level, modern sovereignty has involved both the national state and the transnational market. The “revolutions in sovereignty” that gave rise to the modern state and the modern market were to some considerable extent shaped by theological concepts and changes in religious institutions and practices: first, the supremacy of the modern national state over the transnational papacy and national churches; second, the increasing priority of individuality over collectivity; third, a growing focus on contractual proprietary relations at the expense of covenantal ties and communal bonds (section 3). By subjecting both people and property to uniform standards of formal natural rights and abstract monetary value, financial capitalism and liberal secular democracy are part of the “biopolitical” logic that subordinates the sanctity of life and land to the secular sacrality of the state and the market. In Pope Benedict's theology, we can find the contours of a post‐secular political economy that challenges the monopoly of modern sovereignty (sections 4–5).</div></front></TEI><istex><corpusName>wiley</corpusName><author><json:item><name>ADRIAN PABST</name><affiliations><json:string>University of Kent, Politics and International Relations, Rutherford College Canterbury, CT2 7NX, UKA.Pabst@kent.ac.uk</json:string></affiliations></json:item></author><articleId><json:string>MOTH1633</json:string></articleId><language><json:string>eng</json:string></language><abstract>This essay argues that modern sovereignty is not simply a legal or political concept that is coterminous with the modern nation‐state. Rather, at the theoretical level modern sovereign power is inscribed into a wider theological dialectic between “the one” and “the many”. Modernity fuses juridical‐constitutional models of supreme state authority with a new, “biopolitical” account of power whereby natural life and the living body of the individual are the object of politics and are subject to state control (section 1). The origins of this dialectic go back to changes within Christian theology in the late Middle Ages and the early modern period. In particular, these changes can be traced to Ockham's denial of the universal Good in things, Suárez's priority of the political community over the ecclesial body and Hobbes's “biopolitical” definition of power as state dominion over life (section 2). At the practical level, modern sovereignty has involved both the national state and the transnational market. The “revolutions in sovereignty” that gave rise to the modern state and the modern market were to some considerable extent shaped by theological concepts and changes in religious institutions and practices: first, the supremacy of the modern national state over the transnational papacy and national churches; second, the increasing priority of individuality over collectivity; third, a growing focus on contractual proprietary relations at the expense of covenantal ties and communal bonds (section 3). By subjecting both people and property to uniform standards of formal natural rights and abstract monetary value, financial capitalism and liberal secular democracy are part of the “biopolitical” logic that subordinates the sanctity of life and land to the secular sacrality of the state and the market. In Pope Benedict's theology, we can find the contours of a post‐secular political economy that challenges the monopoly of modern sovereignty (sections 4–5).</abstract><qualityIndicators><score>8</score><pdfVersion>1.3</pdfVersion><pdfPageSize>430.866 x 649.134 pts</pdfPageSize><refBibsNative>false</refBibsNative><keywordCount>0</keywordCount><abstractCharCount>1979</abstractCharCount><pdfWordCount>15365</pdfWordCount><pdfCharCount>93915</pdfCharCount><pdfPageCount>33</pdfPageCount><abstractWordCount>300</abstractWordCount></qualityIndicators><title>MODERN SOVEREIGNTY IN QUESTION: THEOLOGY, DEMOCRACY AND CAPITALISM</title><genre><json:string>article</json:string></genre><host><volume>26</volume><publisherId><json:string>MOTH</json:string></publisherId><pages><total>33</total><last>602</last><first>570</first></pages><issn><json:string>0266-7177</json:string></issn><issue>4</issue><genre><json:string>Journal</json:string></genre><language><json:string>unknown</json:string></language><eissn><json:string>1468-0025</json:string></eissn><title>Modern Theology</title><doi><json:string>10.1111/(ISSN)1468-0025</json:string></doi></host><publicationDate>2010</publicationDate><copyrightDate>2010</copyrightDate><doi><json:string>10.1111/j.1468-0025.2010.01633.x</json:string></doi><id>CE3394C7D3369888B6346A2FEE8F5E69056B2A59</id><fulltext><json:item><original>true</original><mimetype>application/pdf</mimetype><extension>pdf</extension><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/CE3394C7D3369888B6346A2FEE8F5E69056B2A59/fulltext/pdf</uri></json:item><json:item><original>false</original><mimetype>application/zip</mimetype><extension>zip</extension><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/CE3394C7D3369888B6346A2FEE8F5E69056B2A59/fulltext/zip</uri></json:item><istex:fulltextTEI uri="https://api.istex.fr/document/CE3394C7D3369888B6346A2FEE8F5E69056B2A59/fulltext/tei"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title level="a" type="main" xml:lang="en">MODERN SOVEREIGNTY IN QUESTION: THEOLOGY, DEMOCRACY AND CAPITALISM</title><respStmt xml:id="ISTEX-API" resp="Références bibliographiques récupérées via GROBID" name="ISTEX-API (INIST-CNRS)"></respStmt></titleStmt><publicationStmt><authority>ISTEX</authority><publisher>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><pubPlace>Oxford, UK</pubPlace><availability><p>WILEY</p></availability><date>2010</date></publicationStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct type="inbook"><analytic><title level="a" type="main" xml:lang="en">MODERN SOVEREIGNTY IN QUESTION: THEOLOGY, DEMOCRACY AND CAPITALISM</title><author><persName><forename type="first">ADRIAN</forename><surname>PABST</surname></persName><affiliation>University of Kent, Politics and International Relations, Rutherford College Canterbury, CT2 7NX, UKA.Pabst@kent.ac.uk</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="2010-10"></date><biblScope unit="volume">26</biblScope><biblScope unit="issue">4</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" from="570">570</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" to="602">602</biblScope></imprint></monogr><idno type="istex">CE3394C7D3369888B6346A2FEE8F5E69056B2A59</idno><idno type="DOI">10.1111/j.1468-0025.2010.01633.x</idno><idno type="ArticleID">MOTH1633</idno></biblStruct></sourceDesc></fileDesc><profileDesc><creation><date>2010</date></creation><langUsage><language ident="en">en</language></langUsage><abstract xml:lang="en"><p>This essay argues that modern sovereignty is not simply a legal or political concept that is coterminous with the modern nation‐state. Rather, at the theoretical level modern sovereign power is inscribed into a wider theological dialectic between “the one” and “the many”. Modernity fuses juridical‐constitutional models of supreme state authority with a new, “biopolitical” account of power whereby natural life and the living body of the individual are the object of politics and are subject to state control (section 1). The origins of this dialectic go back to changes within Christian theology in the late Middle Ages and the early modern period. In particular, these changes can be traced to Ockham's denial of the universal Good in things, Suárez's priority of the political community over the ecclesial body and Hobbes's “biopolitical” definition of power as state dominion over life (section 2). At the practical level, modern sovereignty has involved both the national state and the transnational market. The “revolutions in sovereignty” that gave rise to the modern state and the modern market were to some considerable extent shaped by theological concepts and changes in religious institutions and practices: first, the supremacy of the modern national state over the transnational papacy and national churches; second, the increasing priority of individuality over collectivity; third, a growing focus on contractual proprietary relations at the expense of covenantal ties and communal bonds (section 3). By subjecting both people and property to uniform standards of formal natural rights and abstract monetary value, financial capitalism and liberal secular democracy are part of the “biopolitical” logic that subordinates the sanctity of life and land to the secular sacrality of the state and the market. In Pope Benedict's theology, we can find the contours of a post‐secular political economy that challenges the monopoly of modern sovereignty (sections 4–5).</p></abstract></profileDesc><revisionDesc><change when="2010-10">Published</change><change xml:id="refBibs-istex" who="#ISTEX-API" when="2016-3-3">References added</change></revisionDesc></teiHeader></istex:fulltextTEI><json:item><original>false</original><mimetype>text/plain</mimetype><extension>txt</extension><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/CE3394C7D3369888B6346A2FEE8F5E69056B2A59/fulltext/txt</uri></json:item></fulltext><metadata><istex:metadataXml wicri:clean="Wiley, elements deleted: body"><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="10004"><doi origin="wiley">10.1111/moth.2010.26.issue-4</doi><numberingGroup><numbering type="journalVolume" number="26">26</numbering><numbering type="journalIssue" number="4">4</numbering></numberingGroup><coverDate startDate="2010-10">October 2010</coverDate></publicationMeta><publicationMeta level="unit" type="article" position="4" status="forIssue"><doi origin="wiley">10.1111/j.1468-0025.2010.01633.x</doi><idGroup><id type="unit" value="MOTH1633"></id></idGroup><countGroup><count type="pageTotal" number="33"></count></countGroup><titleGroup><title type="tocHeading1">Articles</title></titleGroup><copyright>© 2010 Blackwell Publishing Ltd</copyright><eventGroup><event type="xmlConverted" agent="Converter:BPG_TO_WML3G version:2.3.16 mode:FullText" date="2010-09-03"></event><event type="firstOnline" date="2010-09-03"></event><event type="publishedOnlineFinalForm" date="2010-09-03"></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="570">570</numbering><numbering type="pageLast" number="602">602</numbering></numberingGroup><linkGroup><link type="toTypesetVersion" href="file:MOTH.MOTH1633.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="16746"></count><count type="linksPubMed" number="0"></count><count type="linksCrossRef" number="0"></count></countGroup><titleGroup><title type="main">MODERN SOVEREIGNTY IN QUESTION: THEOLOGY, DEMOCRACY AND CAPITALISM</title><title type="shortAuthors">Adrian Pabst</title><title type="short">Modern Sovereignty in Question</title></titleGroup><creators><creator creatorRole="author" xml:id="cr1" affiliationRef="#a1"><personName><givenNames>ADRIAN</givenNames><familyName>PABST</familyName></personName></creator></creators><affiliationGroup><affiliation xml:id="a1"><unparsedAffiliation> University of Kent, Politics and International Relations, Rutherford College Canterbury, CT2 7NX, UK
<email>A.Pabst@kent.ac.uk</email></unparsedAffiliation></affiliation></affiliationGroup><abstractGroup><abstract type="main" xml:lang="en"><title type="main">Abstract</title><p>This essay argues that modern sovereignty is not simply a legal or political concept that is coterminous with the modern nation‐state. Rather, at the theoretical level modern sovereign power is inscribed into a wider theological dialectic between “the one” and “the many”. Modernity fuses juridical‐constitutional models of supreme state authority with a new, “biopolitical” account of power whereby natural life and the living body of the individual are the object of politics and are subject to state control (section 1).</p><p>The origins of this dialectic go back to changes within Christian theology in the late Middle Ages and the early modern period. In particular, these changes can be traced to Ockham's denial of the universal Good in things, Suárez's priority of the political community over the ecclesial body and Hobbes's “biopolitical” definition of power as state dominion over life (section 2).</p><p>At the practical level, modern sovereignty has involved both the national state and the transnational market. The “revolutions in sovereignty” that gave rise to the modern state and the modern market were to some considerable extent shaped by theological concepts and changes in religious institutions and practices: first, the supremacy of the modern national state over the transnational papacy and national churches; second, the increasing priority of individuality over collectivity; third, a growing focus on contractual proprietary relations at the expense of covenantal ties and communal bonds (section 3).</p><p>By subjecting both people and property to uniform standards of formal natural rights and abstract monetary value, financial capitalism and liberal secular democracy are part of the “biopolitical” logic that subordinates the sanctity of life and land to the secular sacrality of the state and the market. In Pope Benedict's theology, we can find the contours of a post‐secular political economy that challenges the monopoly of modern sovereignty (sections 4–5).</p></abstract></abstractGroup></contentMeta></header></component></istex:document></istex:metadataXml><mods version="3.6"><titleInfo lang="en"><title>MODERN SOVEREIGNTY IN QUESTION: THEOLOGY, DEMOCRACY AND CAPITALISM</title></titleInfo><titleInfo type="abbreviated"><title>Modern Sovereignty in Question</title></titleInfo><titleInfo type="alternative" contentType="CDATA" lang="en"><title>MODERN SOVEREIGNTY IN QUESTION: THEOLOGY, DEMOCRACY AND CAPITALISM</title></titleInfo><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">ADRIAN</namePart><namePart type="family">PABST</namePart><affiliation>University of Kent, Politics and International Relations, Rutherford College Canterbury, CT2 7NX, UKA.Pabst@kent.ac.uk</affiliation><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><typeOfResource>text</typeOfResource><genre type="article" displayLabel="article"></genre><originInfo><publisher>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><place><placeTerm type="text">Oxford, UK</placeTerm></place><dateIssued encoding="w3cdtf">2010-10</dateIssued><copyrightDate encoding="w3cdtf">2010</copyrightDate></originInfo><language><languageTerm type="code" authority="rfc3066">en</languageTerm><languageTerm type="code" authority="iso639-2b">eng</languageTerm></language><physicalDescription><internetMediaType>text/html</internetMediaType><extent unit="words">16746</extent></physicalDescription><abstract lang="en">This essay argues that modern sovereignty is not simply a legal or political concept that is coterminous with the modern nation‐state. Rather, at the theoretical level modern sovereign power is inscribed into a wider theological dialectic between “the one” and “the many”. Modernity fuses juridical‐constitutional models of supreme state authority with a new, “biopolitical” account of power whereby natural life and the living body of the individual are the object of politics and are subject to state control (section 1). The origins of this dialectic go back to changes within Christian theology in the late Middle Ages and the early modern period. In particular, these changes can be traced to Ockham's denial of the universal Good in things, Suárez's priority of the political community over the ecclesial body and Hobbes's “biopolitical” definition of power as state dominion over life (section 2). At the practical level, modern sovereignty has involved both the national state and the transnational market. The “revolutions in sovereignty” that gave rise to the modern state and the modern market were to some considerable extent shaped by theological concepts and changes in religious institutions and practices: first, the supremacy of the modern national state over the transnational papacy and national churches; second, the increasing priority of individuality over collectivity; third, a growing focus on contractual proprietary relations at the expense of covenantal ties and communal bonds (section 3). By subjecting both people and property to uniform standards of formal natural rights and abstract monetary value, financial capitalism and liberal secular democracy are part of the “biopolitical” logic that subordinates the sanctity of life and land to the secular sacrality of the state and the market. In Pope Benedict's theology, we can find the contours of a post‐secular political economy that challenges the monopoly of modern sovereignty (sections 4–5).</abstract><relatedItem type="host"><titleInfo><title>Modern Theology</title></titleInfo><genre type="Journal">journal</genre><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>2010</date><detail type="volume"><caption>vol.</caption><number>26</number></detail><detail type="issue"><caption>no.</caption><number>4</number></detail><extent unit="pages"><start>570</start><end>602</end><total>33</total></extent></part></relatedItem><identifier type="istex">CE3394C7D3369888B6346A2FEE8F5E69056B2A59</identifier><identifier type="DOI">10.1111/j.1468-0025.2010.01633.x</identifier><identifier type="ArticleID">MOTH1633</identifier><accessCondition type="use and reproduction" contentType="copyright">© 2010 Blackwell Publishing Ltd</accessCondition><recordInfo><recordContentSource>WILEY</recordContentSource><recordOrigin>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</recordOrigin></recordInfo></mods></metadata><serie></serie></istex></record>Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)
EXPLOR_STEP=$WICRI_ROOT/Wicri/Musique/explor/OperaV1/Data/Istex/Corpus
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_STEP/biblio.hfd -nk 000A44 | SxmlIndent | more
Ou
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Istex/Corpus/biblio.hfd -nk 000A44 | SxmlIndent | more
Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri
{{Explor lien
|wiki= Wicri/Musique
|area= OperaV1
|flux= Istex
|étape= Corpus
|type= RBID
|clé= ISTEX:CE3394C7D3369888B6346A2FEE8F5E69056B2A59
|texte= MODERN SOVEREIGNTY IN QUESTION: THEOLOGY, DEMOCRACY AND CAPITALISM
}}
| This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.21. |  |