the latter works of michel foucault and their implications for the history of christianity
DESCRIPTION
Both during his lifetime and in the decades since, Michel Foucault (1926-1984) has had a towering influence over a wide array of scholarly disciplines while fitting neatly into none. Although ostensibly a philosopher, the majority of his key works took the form of historical enquiries and several of his critical theories have helped shape the study of history at large. Though not a dominant focus of his earlier writings, in the final decade of his life, a theme which began to surface as of key importance was the study of Christianity and its legacy in modernity. Despite ecclesiastical decline, Foucault saw Christianity as continuing to be at the heart of the modern system primarily because of its institution of a pastoral model of power, the ultimate effect of which was the subjectification of human beings. In the years since his untimely death, scholars have directed substantial energy to grappling with the implications of Foucault’s views on religion. In outlining key Foucaultian theories, this essay will examine both the vision that his own application of these theories produced, and ways in which they have been employed by other historians. What emerges in this picture is that Foucault suggests a radical reinterpretation of modern history, seeking not only to destabilise current power structures, but to suggest a direction towards building new ones. Finally, the essay will consider the bases for these views and provide an overall critical viewpoint of the implications of Foucault for the history of Christianity.!TRANSCRIPT
-
January 2014 SN: 1388816The Latter Works of Michel Foucault !
and their Implications for the History of Christianity!!Both during his lifetime and in the decades since, Michel Foucault (1926-1984) has had a towering
influence over a wide array of scholarly disciplines while fitting neatly into none. Although 1
ostensibly a philosopher, the majority of his key works took the form of historical enquiries and
several of his critical theories have helped shape the study of history at large. Though not a
dominant focus of his earlier writings, in the final decade of his life, a theme which began to
surface as of key importance was the study of Christianity and its legacy in modernity. Despite
ecclesiastical decline, Foucault saw Christianity as continuing to be at the heart of the modern
system primarily because of its institution of a pastoral model of power, the ultimate effect of which
was the subjectification of human beings. In the years since his untimely death, scholars have
directed substantial energy to grappling with the implications of Foucaults views on religion. In
outlining key Foucaultian theories, this essay will examine both the vision that his own application
of these theories produced, and ways in which they have been employed by other historians. What
emerges in this picture is that Foucault suggests a radical reinterpretation of modern history,
seeking not only to destabilise current power structures, but to suggest a direction towards building
new ones. Finally, the essay will consider the bases for these views and provide an overall critical
viewpoint of the implications of Foucault for the history of Christianity.!
!The Difficulty of Systematising Foucault!
Foucaults work is notorious for its stubborn resistance to systematisation. Not only was the author
himself careful to distance himself from almost any label, but his work rarely lends itself to building
a concrete definition of his theories. This, in part, is an outworking of his general philosophy of
difference and resistance to received norms, a fact perfectly illustrated by his words in The
Archeology of Knowledge (1969:17):!
!
1
In 2007, Foucault was listed as the most cited author in humanities. accessed 12/01/2014.
-
January 2014 SN: 1388816I am not where you are lying in wait for me, but over here, laughing at you?Do not ask me who I am and do not ask me to remain the same: leave it to our bureaucrats and our police to see that our papers are in order. !2!
Is it then an exercise in futility to approach Foucault with any question that begins, What was
Foucaults theory of? As scholars have pointed out, although it may seem contrary to the spirit
of his work, a certain amount of systematisation of Foucaults thinking must be necessary if we are
to understand him and apply his theories to the problems he most deeply cared about. And yet,
with regards to Foucault on religion, the problem is apparently exacerbated as his views often
remained implicit. Jeremy Carrette, one of the leading scholars in this field, admits that before 3
1976, when Foucault first began to explicitly examine Christianity, his views in this area are but a
sub-text in his writings. However, whether one sees Foucaults turn to religion as an abrupt 4
about-face, or, as Carrette argues, the outworking of an important thread present from the
beginning, the significance which Foucault accords to religion in the latter part of his work is more
than sufficient to warrant sustained discussion. !
!Christianity in Foucaults Later Work!
As already stated, Foucault took on a specific interest in religion, by which he referred almost
exclusively to Christianity, from 1976 onwards. The main, book-length text in which he explores
implications for the topic is The History of Sexuality (Volume 1, 1976; Volumes 2 and 3, 1984).
Apart from this, also key to our understanding are his 1979 Tanner Lecture, Omnes et Singulatim:
Towards a Criticism of Political Reason, as well as his afterword The Subject and Power to
Huber Dreyfus and Paul Rabinows Michel Foucault: Beyond Structuralism and Hermeneutics
(1982). For the purposes of this essay, because of their uncharacteristically systematic style, we
will focus on the content of these latter two texts. Together, they outline Foucaults, perhaps, main
2
Foucault, Michel, The Archeology of Knowledge, (Paris, 1969), tr. Alan Smith (London, 1991), p.217. For a discussion of this criticism see Fitzgerald, Timothy, Problematising discourses on religion, 3Cultures and Religion, Vol. 2, No. 1 (May 2008), pp. 103-111. Carrette, Jeremy, Foucault and Religion: Spiritual Corporality and Political Spirituality, (London, 42000), p.1.
-
January 2014 SN: 1388816theory on the topic: Christianity led to the modern subjectification of the individual through the
structure of pastoral power. !
!However, before looking at Foucaults specific theories on Christianity, it is important to review his
general historical approaches and expressed intentions. By the time of these latter works,
Foucaults main methodological principles were well established. His method of archeology, which
had been explicitly expounded upon in The Archeology of Knowledge (1969), sought to show that
systems of thought are governed by specific rules that operate beneath the consciousness of
human beings. Forming what he termed an episteme, the confines of these rules establish a realm
of conceptual possibilities that determine what a person in that period will be able to think. 5
Archeology challenged the idea, in line with the Annales school of history before him, that the
conscious thoughts of humans beings were essential in driving history. Essentially, Foucault
developed this methodological tool to show the absolute contingency of modern ways of thinking
by showing that people in previous times inhabited completely different intellectual spaces. !6
!Building upon the archeological method, Foucault then sought to describe the actual process of
historical change itself through the elaboration of what he called genealogy. This idea, though
never clearly explained as with archeology, was first put into use by Foucault in Discipline and
Punish (1975). Genealogy further reinforced his notion of the contingency of the present system by
showing that a multiplicity of wholly material causes are responsible for historical change. The
force of these causes are wrought upon the human body and as a result produce unconscious,
deep-seated change in people as subjects. !7
!
3
Gutting, Gary, "Michel Foucault", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2013 5Edition), Edward N. Zalta, ed., , accessed 10/01/14. Ibid, Michel Foucault: A Very Short Introduction, (Oxford, 2005), pp. 33-34. 6
Ibid, 20137
-
January 2014 SN: 1388816In using this term, Foucault had intended to align himself with Friedrich Nietzsche (1844-1900),
specifically referencing his Genealogy of Morals: An Attack (1887). Like Nietzsche, Foucault
envisioned the genealogical method to uncover the fact that the present was the result of nothing
more than the contingent turns of history. For both, the important conclusion of this theory was 8
that everything that makes up the present system, from modes of thinking, to power structures, to
morals, is completely contingent and not, as Christianity for example may have it, universal. !
!Foucault was not so much interested in applying the archeological and genealogical methods to
the origins of Christianity itself, but was driven primarily by an interest in unsettling the modern
system. His contention was that, although having experienced surface institutional decline, the
structures of thought and government produced by Christianity still operated in function at the
deepest levels of modern society. Therefore, only through understanding its Christian genealogy
could human subjectification be refused. !9
!With these preliminary points in view, we are now in a position to briefly examine the contours of
Foucaults central theses regarding Christianity. The starting point of his analysis was the
realisation that political power in European societies has evolved towards increasingly centralised
forms. But alongside this development there has been the evolution of techniques to control the
individual in a "continuous and permanent" way. These techniques, analogous to the carceral
society explored in Discipline and Punish, he called pastorship. !10
!In the first part of his Omnes et Singulatim lecture, Foucault argued that the pastoral mode of
power was largely unknown to the Greeks and Romans, and instead originated in Oriental
4
Gutting, 20138
Chrulew, Matthew, The Pauline Ellipsis in Foucaults Genealogy of Christianity, Journal for 9Cultural and Religious Theory, Vol. 11, No. 1 (2010), p.11. Foucault, Michel, Omnes et Singulatim: Towards a Criticism of Political Reason, The Tanner 10Lectures on Human Values, (Berkeley, 1979), p.227
-
January 2014 SN: 1388816societiesespecially the Hebrews. Contrasting pastoral power with Greek thought, he identified 11
four essential characteristics of the shepherd leader: (1) his power is over a flock rather than land;
(2) his action and presence holds the flock together; (3) he is responsible for the flocks eternal
salvation; (4) because his power is less a duty than a devotedness, he keeps careful watch over
his flock. This keeping watch is important, Foucault argues, because it necessitates the shepherd 12
know the flock corporately and individually, paying attention to all and constantly being aware of
each ones needs. Having originated in the Hebrew view of God, attached to this was the
requirement that the sheep submit to the shepherd and obey his will, making obedience a virtue in
itself. This relationship was based on the shepherds intimate inner knowledge of the sheep 13
which Christianity effected in the institution of confession. Foucault laid great emphasis on this as a
form of parrhesia, or the boldness to tell the full truthsomething which Bernauer claims he wanted
to recover as a key value in his own life. However, the goal of Christian confession and 14
submissive relationship to the pastor was to get individuals to work towards their own moral purity.
The resulting picture, as Foucault paints it, was the emergence of a link between total obedience,
knowledge of oneself, and confession to someone else, all of which were key in the development
of the Christian self-identity as obedient subject. Seeing as Foucault defined the essence of 15
power as the ability to influence the actions of others, this made the pastoral mode both a totalising
and individualising form of power. !16
! !
In the second part of the lecture, Foucault traces how both the reason of state and theory of police,
as developed in France and Germany in the eighteenth century, are built upon the foundation of
pastoral power. These theories then, in forming the cornerstone of modern government, perpetuate
5
Foucault, 1979: 227. 11
Ibid: 228-23012
Ibid: 23713
Bernauer, James, Michel Foucaults Philosophy of Religion: An Introduction to the Non-Fascist 14Life, in Carrette, Jeremy, ed., Michel Foucault and Theology, (Aldershot, 2004), p. 92 Ibid: 23915
Foucault, 1982: 24216
-
January 2014 SN: 1388816pastorship in secular forms. Just as the pastor was endowed with the responsibility to not only
guard, but provide for his sheep, the police and state were envisioned to have the same role.
Similarly, for this system to function, the state is required to constantly monitor individuals and to
encourage self knowledge and inner discipline. Modern psychoanalysis even takes the place of
confession. !17
!Once these theories are outlined, it immediately becomes apparent that Foucault suggested a
radical reinterpretation both of the origins of the modern world and its functioning in the present.
Most importantly, his reading was a radical rejection of the traditional secularisation theory still en
vogue at the time of his writing. Drawing from his analysis, Foucault concluded that from the
sixteenth century onwards, instead of gradually losing its Christian character, European society
had undergone a phase of in-depth Christianisation. !18
!It has already been stated that Foucault's central interest was in addressing present problems in
society. His contention therefore was not with Christianity as a belief system, however it was with
the forms of oppression he claimed it had helped spawn. With this in mind, Dreyfus and Rabinow
concluded their seminal study on Foucaults work with several provocative questions, one of which
probed Foucault, Is there a way to make resistance positive, that is, to move toward a 'new
economy of bodies and pleasures?'" Though it might seem the logical outcome of his highly
contingent view of history, Foucault did not see his theories as leading to mere pessimism, but
instead to the positive realisation that the current oppressive systems can be undermined. There is
therefore a glimmer of hope to his analysis. But in case one imagined this led to some triumphant
teleology, he was quick to point out that he did not think we were headed towards a golden era, but
that this effort of resistance continual. Power relationships were inherent in society, but one must
work with a hyperactive pessimism to aim that they be less oppressive. !19
6
Foucault,1979: 243-25217
Ibid, Abnormal: Lectures at the Collge de France: 1974-1975, (New York, 2003), p. 17718
Dreyfus, 1982: 26419
-
January 2014 SN: 1388816!Interpretations and Applications!
Since Foucault first propounded these theories, a wide variety of scholars have analysed their
implications for religion, both philosophically and historically. John McSweeney locates the 20
beginning of interest in this aspect of Foucault to James Bernauers analysis in Michel Foucaults
Force of Flight (1990). But even during his lifetime, Dreyfus and Rabinows Beyond Structuralism 21
and Hermeneutics (1982) interviewed Foucault on his views on Christianity, leading to helpful and
concise statements of his theories. Also key, among a series of theological treatments, was John
Milbanks seminal study, Theology and Social Theory (1990), which proffered the argument that all
scientific social theories are themselves theologies or anti-theologies in disguise. This work 22
included a detailed critique of Foucaults ideas on religion which will be considered below. !23
!More recently, there has been a focussed interest in the topic following works such as Carrettes
monograph, Foucault and Religion (2000), and Michel Foucault and Theology (2004), jointly edited
with James Bernauer. Carrettes contribution to the field has been especially significant for its
attempt to analyse the religious sub-text which he claims underlies all of Foucaults works. In 24
Foucaults writings prior to 1976, Carrette characterises his view on religion as spiritual corporality.
By this he refers to Foucaults emphasis in this period, expressed through what he sees as implicit
statements, on religion being inseparable from cultural practice and discourse, as well as being
inextricably tied to the body. This, in effect, functioned to thoroughly materialise religion and show
7
For an excellent review of the literature up to 2005, see McSweeney, John, Foucault and 20Theology, Foucault Studies, No. 2 (May 2005), pp. 117-144. accessed 12/01/14. McSweeney, John, Foucault and ReligionGuest Editors Introduction, Foucault Studies, No. 15 21(Feb. 2013), pp-4-8. Milbank, John, Theology and Social Theory, (Oxford, 1990), p. 3. 22
Judging from Foucaults own writings, although himself an atheist, it is not altogether improbable 23that he would have agreed with Milbanks characterisation of his work as in some sense theological, as negative theology was one of the few styles with which he compared his thought. On this, see Bernauer, James, Secular self-sacrifice: on Michel Foucaults courses at the Collge de France, in C.H Prado, ed., Foucaults Legacy, (London, 2009), p.158n8. Carrette, 2000: 224
-
January 2014 SN: 1388816its contingent nature. However, in his works from 1976 onwards, Carrette argues that Foucaults
focus shifted instead to the idea of political spirituality, which essentially references his arguments
regarding pastorship and the results of religion for power relationships. Carrette concludes that 25
the two theories formed a single critique which shows religion to be far more culturally significant
than hitherto recognised by academics. !26
!While Carrettes latter idea of political spirituality seems to be in line with wider scholarly
consensus, the former, spiritual corporality, has been met with more criticism precisely because it
claims to deal with a sub-text in Foucaults work. As has been discussed, it is contentious enough
already to define Foucaults thoughts in areas where he is vocal. Therefore some scholars feel
compelled to reject the even more ambitious idea of trying to derive theories from silent areas in
his thinking. In either case, Carrettes work has sparked significant debate and demonstrated that a
case can certainly be made for Foucaults 1963 claim that there may be a religious question
underlying his work.!
!Apart from attempts to define Foucaults thoughts on religion, various historians have also put his
analyses to use in developing new readings of Christian history. Some, notably Peter Brown in The
Body and Society (1988), reflect Foucault primarily in their choice of topic and in their general
mode of enquiry while arriving at more conservative, and less presentist conclusions. Similarly,
Michael Gillespies The Theological Origins of Modernity (2008) makes clear use of the
archeological and genealogical methods, and is predicated on present concerns, but significantly
departs from Foucault in its focus on the traditional historical object of the text. !
!More radical, however, have been the Foucaultian genealogical analyses of fascism forwarded by
James Bernauers article Sexuality in the Nazi War (1998) and Michael Lackeys chapter in
Foucaults Legacy (2009), Foucault, Secularization Theory and the Theological Origins of
8
Carrette, 2000: 143-151 25
Carrette, 2000: 15226
-
January 2014 SN: 1388816Totalitarianism. Both authors draw inspiration from Foucaults comment that there is a fascism in
us all, in our heads and in our everyday behaviour. Thus, coupled with Foucaults theories 27
shown above, these authors sought to show the historical link between Fascism and Christianity. !
!Bernauers genealogy of the Nazi repression of Jews and homosexuals argued that the necessary
conditions for the rise of fascism were originated in a Christian legacy which demonised both the
Jew and the flesh. Lackey, on the other hand, uses Foucault to reach even more disturbing 28
conclusions regarding Nazi fascism. He begins with the premise that what makes an idea Christian
or not depends not on what Christianity says about it, but on the conditions of knowledge within
which it developed. On this basis, he argues Hitler believed that divine truth legitimated and took 29
precedent over political truth, an idea inherited from Christianity, and that by this he justified his
diabolical schemes in the name of God. Thus, Lackey claims, to say that Hitler merely appropriated
a form of political religiosityas even Bernauer allowedwould be an anachronism. Indeed, if we
understand Hitlers episteme, this would have rendered the religious element false and therefore
the political dimension illegitimate. Therefore, in effect, Lackeys shocking conclusion is that
according to a Foucaultian reading, Hitlers fascism not only derived from a Christian origin, but
should in fact be called authentically Christian. !30
!The works reviewed, and Lackeys in particular, show the radical effect that a Foucaultian reading
can have on the study of history as well the philosophy of religion. Indeed, whether adopting the
full ramifications of Foucaults worldview, or merely appropriating his methods, he has provided
critical methodological tools that have been of great influence in many disciplines. !
!
9
Foucault, Michel, Preface to Deleuze, Gilles, and Guattari, Flix, Anti-Oedipus: Capitalism and 27Schizophrenia, (London, 2004), p. xiv. Bernauer, James, Sexuality in the Nazi War Against Jewish and Gay People: A Foucaultian 28Perspective, Budhi, Vol. 2, No. 3 (1998), pp. 149-168. Lackey, Michael, Foucault, Secularization Theory, and the Theological Origins of 29Totalitarianism, in C. G. Prado, ed., Foucaults Legacy, (London, 2009), p. 130. Lackey, 2009: 13830
-
January 2014 SN: 1388816As circumstances change in each successive period, it is in the spirit of Foucault to continually
consider what forces should be resisted and undermined today. In thinking about present areas
where future Foucaultian studies might be particularly apt to achieve these ends, one might take a
cue from the epilogue of Gillespies Theological Origins of Modernity and develop a critical
genealogy of extremist Islam. Even though Foucault would certainly be concerned with defending
the dignity of Muslim extremists themselves, insomuch as he might have seen them as modernitys
discontents, it seems he would equally wish to undermine their own ideological basis as well in the
interests of resisting oppression, especially where extremism is linked to Muslim states. !
!Foucaulting Foucault: Criticisms!
Although Foucault has been hugely influential in this area, it is clear that many of his ideas and
approaches have received an array of criticism. We will briefly consider a selection of these
criticisms with regards to the validity of Foucaults method of history, his reading of Christianity, and
the internal coherence of his philosophy. !
!Firstly, the claim can be made that to begin a historical enquiry with the explicit aim of solving
current issues, such as undermining oppressive discourses, will inevitably lead to self-serving
interpretations. If one has in mind the intent to destabilise a particular institution or discourse of
truth, the tendency in historical research will not be to study the thing to understand it on its own
terms, but instead to search for elements and form structures that prove a preexisting bias.
Perhaps, and truthfully, this can be defended by saying that while none can be truly objective,
perhaps it is best to be open-handed with ones intentions and aim to fight injustice. This would
indeed be admirable. But in such a case, even if the practice can be justified, wouldnt the thrust of
Foucaults own attempts to undermine oppressive discourses still end up being nothing more than
alternative oppressive discourses in themselves? As King has suggested, just as they shake the
foundations of current forces which silence and oppress some, wouldnt they inevitably silence and
10
-
January 2014 SN: 1388816oppress other voices? In the end, it seems that in subverting one discourse of truth, Foucaults 31
methods simply establish another one implicitly in its place. !
!On the basis of this criticism, it can be argued that Foucaults intent of discrediting modernitys
Christian origins leads him to ignore key aspects of Christian history which do not fit comfortably
with his thesis. One such claim has been made forcefully by Matthew Chrulew, who argues this in
relation to Foucaults complete silence on the figure of the Apostle Paul. His contention is that
although Paul is undoubtedly the most influential figure in the founding of Christianity after Jesus,
he pays him no attention because he is inconvenient to his thesis of pastoral power. Foucaults
view was that Christianity in its real pastoral organisation is not an ascetic religion, it is not a
religion of the community, it is not a mystical religion, it is not a religion of Scripture, and, of course,
it is not an eschatological religion. In light of this, Chrulew points out, then the ascetic, 32
apocalyptic, communitarian Paul, quoter and author of Scriptureas well as receiver of mystical
experiencescan hardly be said to be Christian at all. Similarly, authors such as Christina 33
Petterson have shown that Foucaults picture of Christianity is made almost entirely in reference to
Roman Catholicism, and his model of pastoral power applies only very weakly in a Protestant
setting. This is especially significant in light of the claim that the focus of modernitys 34
development shifted after the Reformation to the largely Protestant North. Furthermore, it is worth
considering that Foucaults analysis is completely Eurocentric in its vision of Christianity, not taking
into account the exponential growth of the global church in the twentieth century. !
!Theologically, one important aspect which Foucault seems ignorant of, is that his implicit attack on
Christianity is based upon the resources of the Christian faith itself. Theologian Timothy Keller,
11
King, Richard, Foucault and the study of religion in a post-colonial age, Culture and Religion, 31Vol. 2, No. 1 (May 2008), p. 117. Foucault, Michel, Security, Territory, Population: Lectures at the Collge De France, 1977-78, tr. 32Graham Burchell, eds. Michel Senellart et al. (New York, 2007). Chrulew, 2010: 1233
Petterson, Christina, Colonial Subjectification: Foucault, Christianity and Governmentality, 34Cultural Studies Review, Vol. 18, No. 2 (2012), pp. 89-108.
-
January 2014 SN: 1388816supported by scholars such as C. John Sommerville, has argued that the Bible gives us the tools
for analysis and unflinching critique of religiously supported injustice from within the faith. While 35
Foucault decries the systems, and the people within them who would exert their power over others,
this was already the clear and passionate message of the Hebrew prophets against their own
society. Also, tellingly for Christianity, it was Jesus who radically first told his disciples, !
!You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and those who are great exercise authority over them. Yet it shall not be so among you; but whoever desires to become great among you, let him be your servant. !36!
In this way, it is possible to see that Foucault not only creates a skewed picture of the nature of
Christianity, and therefore also its effects, but that he simultaneously relies on Christianity for the
moral foundation of his critique. This leads us to consider some of the philosophical problems that
Foucault encounters in general.!
!Foucaults philosophy of history, like Nietzsches before him, is essentially built on suspicion and
the negative intent to subvert. But as we can see, one of the problems it runs into is trying not to
undermine itself in the process. Foucaults claim was, !
!My point is not that everything is bad, but that everything is dangerous, which is not exactly the same as bad. If everything is dangerous, then we always have something to do. So my position leads not to apathy but to a hyper- and pessimistic activism. !37!
But if his archeological and genealogical methods essentially combine to argue that history is
made up of nothing but contingent turns of history, with human beings constantly constrained by
unconscious forces, what room is there for activism? Not only does it suggest that human beings,
in whatever case, are not free to act otherwise, it also undermines its own moral imperative. This
question was posed by Dreyfus and Rabinow in the conclusion to Beyond Structuralism, realising
12
Keller, Timothy, The Reason for God, (London, 2008), p. 60. Also see, Sommerville, C. John, 35The Decline of the Secular University, (New York, 2006), p. 63 Matthew 20:25-2736
Foucault, 1982: 23137
-
January 2014 SN: 1388816that genealogy undermines any resistance which is based on subjective preferences. It is clear 38
that part of Foucaults central aim was to undermine the idea that universal values, which could be
used to control, silence and subjectify, were nothing but socio-historical constructs. Thus, how can
he sustain the values he espouses, such as freedom and justice, without the return to a
metaphysics he denies? This question leads Milbank to claim that despite his rejection of the
Enlightenment myth, Foucaults historical and ethical vision is but another theologically
underpinned, optimistic positivist story in disguise. !39
!Conclusion!
All in all, the essay has shown that the contents of Foucaults latter works hold important
ramifications both for the philosophy and history of Christianity. In an attempt to subvert what he
saw as the oppressive system of power at work in modern, disciplinary society, he aimed to show
that its origins were contingent upon a Christian heritage. The Christian system of pastoral power,
with its emphasis on confession and obedience, was the source of a process by which modern
persons have become controlled, obedient subjects. Historians, in turn, have taken these ideas
and applied them to specific themes, such as Nazi Fascism, to show the devastating conclusions
of a Foucaultian reading of religion. However, in a critical analysis of Foucaults methods and
underlying philosophical assumptions, it can be argued that his interpretation is distorted, or at
least, according to his own theories, nothing more than another subjective interpretation. There is
little doubt that Foucaults intentions were admirable and aimed at creating a less-oppressive
world. But the fatal problem that confronts his theories is whether they can stand under the weight
of their own subversive pessimism. !
!Word Count (excl. footnotes): 4000
13
Dreyfus, 1982: 20638
Milbank, 1990: 28839
-
January 2014 SN: 1388816Bibliography!!Alles, Gregory, Religious Studies After Foucault: Comments on Carrette, Culture and Religion, Vol. 2, No. 1 (2008), pp. 121-126.!!Bernauer, James, Sexuality in the Nazi War Against Jewish and Gay People: A Foucaultian Perspective, Budhi, Vol. 2, No. 3 (1998), pp. 149-168.!!_____________, James, Secular self-sacrifice: on Michel Foucaults courses at the Collge de France, in C.H Prado, ed., Foucaults Legacy, (London, 2009).!!Carrette, Jeremy, Foucault and Religion: Spiritual Corporality and Political Spirituality, (London, 2000).!!_____________, and Bernauer, James, eds., Michel Foucault and Theology: The Politics of Religious Experience (Aldershot, 2004). !!Chrulew, Matthew, The Pauline Ellipsis in Foucault0s Genealogy of Christianity, Journal for Cultural and Religious Theory, Vol. 11, No. 1 (2010), pp. 1-15.!!Dreyfus, Hubert and Rabinow, Paul, Michel Foucault: Beyond Structuralism and Hermeneutics, (Chicago, 1982).!!Fitzgerald, Timothy, Problematising Discourses on Religion, Cultures and Religion, Vol. 2, No. 1 (May 2008), pp. 103-111.!!Foucault, Michel, The Archeology of Knowledge, (Paris, 1969), tr. Alan Smith (London, 1991). !!_____________, Abnormal: Lectures at the Collge de France: 1974-1975, (New York, 2003). !!_____________, Preface to Deleuze, Gilles, and Guattari, Flix, Anti-Oedipus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia, (London, 2004).!!_____________, Security, Territory, Population: Lectures at the Collge De France, 1977-78, tr. Graham Burchell, eds. Michel Senellart et al. (New York, 2007).!!Gutting, Gary, Michel Foucalt: A Very Short Introduction, (Oxford, 2005). !!___________, "Michel Foucault", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2013 Edition), Edward N. Zalta, ed., , accessed 10/01/14.!!Hare, John, "Religion and Morality", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2010 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = .!!Holland, Nancy, Truth as Force: Michel Foucault on Religion, State Power and the Law, Journal of Law and Religion, Vol. 18, No. 1 (2002-2003), pp. 79-97. !!Keller, Timothy, The Reason for God, (London, 2008).!!King, Richard, Foucault and the study of religion in a post-colonial age, Culture and Religion, Vol. 2, No. 1 (May 2008), pp. 113-120.!!Lackey, Michael, Foucault, Secularization theory, and the Theological Origins of Totalitarianism, in C. G. Prado, ed., Foucaults Legacy, (London, 2009).!!McCutcheon, Russell, Review symposium on Jeremy Carrette's Foucault and Religion and Religion and Culture, Culture and Religion, Vol. 2, No. 1 (2008), pp. 99-102. !!McSweeney, John, Foucault and ReligionGuest Editors Introduction, Foucault Studies, No. 15 (Feb. 2013), pp-4-8.!!Milbank, John, Theology and Social Theory, (Oxford, 1990).!!Petterson, Christina, Colonial Subjectification: Foucault, Christianity and Governmentality, Cultural Studies Review, Vol. 18, No. 2 (2012), pp. 89-108.
14