Search Results

This book explores the dynamics of the discourse of slavery, referred to as doulology, in the homilies of fourth-century priest and bishop John Chrysostom. Drawing on the analytical concepts of Michel Foucault as well as the critical theories of Michel de Certeau and Pierre Bourdieu, the book discusses three presuppositions that are central to the study of slavery: first, slavery was a functional institution in the Roman Empire up to the mid-fifth century; second, the Roman institution of slavery suffered a complete systemic collapse due to the lack of both supply and demand during the years of the disintegration of the later Roman Empire; and third, late ancient Christianity accepted slavery as a necessary social institution. This introductory chapter considers the importance of slavery as a discourse in early Christianity, the basic features of slavery in late antiquity, and the pervasive yet sustaining carcerality of the slave economy. It also explains how the heteronomy of the body shaped early Christian doulology, and in particular, Chrysostomic doulology.

This chapter examines the metaphor of slavery in John Chrysostom's theology and how it became theologized and was implemented in the making of Christian subjectivity as an expression of Christian corporeal heteronomy. It first considers the theology of the apostle Paul with regards to slavery and how he influenced Chrysostom's metaphor and theology of slavery. It then discusses the role of sin in the dynamics of doulology, with particular emphasis on free moral agency and how slavery, through the catalyst of hamartiology (the discourse of sin), functioned in other modes of Chrysostom's theology, including his anthropology, protology, Christology, and eschatology. It also explores slavery to the passions by focusing on Chrysostom's reading of 1 Corinthians 7:21–23. The chapter concludes by commenting on Chrysostom's argument that it is better to be an institutional slave than a slave of sin and the passions, and that divine bondage is what defines Christian freedom.

This chapter examines the place of slavery within John Chrysostom's program of domestic pastoralization. It begins with an overview of the nature and dynamics of domestic pastoralization, especially as it relates to slaves in the household. It then considers Chrysostom's distinction between strategic slaveholding (owning a large number of slaves) and tactical slaveholding (owning only a few slaves). It also discusses Chrysostom's belief that slaveholders should take responsibility for the pastoral care of their slaves, and that urban slaveholders take better care of their slaves than their rural counterparts. Finally, it explores the implications of pastoralization and Chrysostom's brand of doulology for Roman aristocracy and their relationship to the crisis of masculinity in the fourth century.

This chapter explores the role of aretagogy—the teaching of virtue—as well as discipline and punishment of slaves in John Chrysostom's doulology. It begins with an overview of the nature, dynamics, and complexities of aretagogy in Roman antiquity before turning to Chrysostom's Christianized program of reform for slaves and its focus on aretagogy, along with the association between virtue and masculinity. It then discusses Chrysostom's comments on the surveillance of slaves, with particular emphasis on the interiorization of surveillance, or self-surveillance, his utilization of the Christic panopticon to regulate slave bodies, and the counter-surveillance provided by slaves. Finally, it examines how punishment was justified theologically and socially.

This concluding chapter summarizes the book's findings and assesses their relevance in understanding slavery as a discourse preached by John Chrysostom. It considers what can be deduced from Chrysostom's homilies about the impact of Christianity on slavery in late antiquity and highlights the role played by his homilies in transmitting a Christianized doulology to later Roman society. It also examines Chrysostom's use of metaphors and stereotypes of the slave strategically in his homilies to influence Christian identity and the identity of outsiders. It argues that Chrysostom's homilies exhibit very little empathy toward slaves and that Chrysostom was more concerned about the condition of the human soul than slavery. Finally, it discusses Chrysostom's preaching about slaveholding as part of his rhetoric concerning the management and renunciation of wealth.