The Ambiguity of Kant's Concept of the Visible Church
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
This paper explores the implications of Manfred Kuehn’s observation that Kant’s claim in Religion within the Boundaries of Mere Reason that the ethical community must be a community under God seems “a bit strained.” After clarifying Kant’s train of thought that results in his conception of the ethical community in the form of the “visible church,” the paper argues that the seemingly strong religious dimension may be misleading. If we understand the ethical community to be the development of the kingdom of ends in the Groundwork , it becomes apparent that Kant’s notion of God’s “sovereignty” over the ethical community is a shared sovereignty lodged in rationality and not in God’s own will. The “strain” that Kuehn senses thus suggests the potentially gratuitous nature of Kant’s references to God’s sovereignty over the ethical community. Despite the initial appearances, Kant’s account of the ethical community in the form of the visible church is, over the long term, closer to a secularizing move than to a robustly religious one.
Article Details
By submitting his/her work to the Editorial Board, the author accepts, upon having his/her text recommended for publication, that Diametros applies the Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) license to the works we publish. Under this license, authors agree to make articles legally available for reuse, without permission or fees. Anyone may read, download, copy, print, distribute or reuse these articles without asking prior permission from the publisher or the author, as long as the author and original source are properly cited. The author holds the copyright without any other restrictions. Full information about CC-BY: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode.
How to Cite
References
Anderson-Gold S. (2001), Unnecessary Evil: History and Moral Progress in the Philosophy of Immanuel Kant, State University Press of New York, Albany.
Anderson-Gold S., Muchnik P. (eds.) (2010), Kant’s Anatomy of Evil, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Banham G. (2003), Kant’s Practical Philosophy: From Critique to Doctrine, Palgrave Macmillan, London.
Bonhoeffer D. (1972), Letters and Papers from Prison, E. Bethge (ed.), Macmillan, New York.
Chignell A., Anderson P., Firestone C. et al. (2012), “Symposium: Kant’s Philosophy of Religion,” Faith and Philosophy 29: 144–228.
Despland M. (1973), Kant on History and Religion, McGill-Queen’s University Press, Montreal, London.
DiCenso J.J. (2012), Kant’s Religion within the Boundaries of Mere Reason: A Commentary, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
DiCenso J.J. (2019), “Kant on Ethical Institutions,” The Southern Journal of Philosophy 57 (1): 30–55.
Flikschuh K. (2009), “Kant’s Kingdom of Ends: Metaphysical, not Political,” [in:] Kant’s Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals: A Critical Guide, J. Timmermann (ed.), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge: 119–139.
Flikschuh K. (2011), “Gottesdienst und Afterdienst: die Kirche als öffentliche Institution?,” [in:] I. Kant, Die Religion innerhalb der Grenzen der bloßen Vernunft, O. Höffe (ed.), Akademie Verlag, Berlin: 193–210.
Förster E. (2000), Kant’s Final Synthesis: An Essay on the Opus Postumum, Harvard University Press, Cambridge MA.
Grenberg J.M. (2010), “Social Dimensions of Kant’s Conception of Radical Evil,” [in:] Kant’s Anatomy of Evil, S. Anderson-Gold, P. Muchnik (eds.), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge: 173–194.
Guyer P. (2000), Kant on Freedom, Law, and Happiness, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Guyer P. (2009), “The Crooked Timber of Mankind,” [in:] Kant’s Idea for a Universal History with a Cosmopolitan Aim: A Critical Guide, A. Rorty, J. Schmidt (eds.), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge: 129–149.
Höffe O. (ed.) (2011), Die Religion innerhalb der Grenzen der bloßen Vernunft, Akademie Verlag, Berlin.
Kant I. (1793/1996), Religion within the Boundaries of Mere Reason, trans. G. Di Giovanni, [in:] I. Kant, Religion and Rational Theology, A.W. Wood, G. Di Giovanni (eds.), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge: 39–216.
Kant I. (1788/1997), Critique of Practical Reason, trans. M.J. Gregor, [in:] I. Kant, Practical Philosophy, M.J. Gregor (ed.), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge: 133–272.
Kant I. (1785/2012), Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals, trans. and ed. M.J. Gregor, J. Timmermann, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Kneller J., Axinn S. (eds.) (1998), Autonomy and Community: Readings in Contemporary Kantian Social Philosophy, State University of New York Press, Albany.
Korsgaard C. (1996), Creating the Kingdom of Ends, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Kuehn M. (2001), Kant: A Biography, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Louden R. (2011), Kant’s Human Being: Essays on His Theory of Human Nature, Oxford University Press, New York.
MacIntyre A., Ricoeur P. (1969), The Religious Significance of Atheism, Columbia University Press, New York, London.
Mariña J. (1997), “Kant on Grace: A Reply to his Critics,” Religious Studies 33: 379–400.
Mariña J. (2017), “Kant’s Robust Theory of Grace,” Con-Textos Kantianos 6: 302–320.
Michalson G. (1999), Kant and the Problem of God, Blackwell, Oxford.
Michalson G. (2001), “God and Kant’s Ethical Commonwealth,” The Thomist 65: 67–92.
Michalson G. (ed.) (2014), Kant’s Religion within the Boundaries of Mere Reason: A Critical Guide, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Miller E. (2015), Kant’s Religion within the Boundaries of Mere Reason, Bloomsbury, London.
Muchnik P., Pasternack L. (2017), “A Guide to Kant’s Treatment of Grace,” International Journal of Philosophy 6: 256–271.
O’Neill O. (2015), Constructing Authorities: Reason, Politics and Interpretation in Kant’s Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Palmquist S.R. (2017), “Kant’s Model for Building the True Church: Transcending ‘Might Makes Right’ and ‘Should Makes Good’ through the Idea of a Non-Coercive Theocracy,” Diametros 54: 76–94.
Pasternack L. (2014), Kant on Religion within the Boundaries of Mere Reason: An Interpretation and Defense, Routledge, London, New York.
Reath A. (2006), Agency and Autonomy in Kant’s Moral Theory: Selected Essays, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Rorty A., Schmidt J. (eds.) (2009), Kant’s Idea for a Universal History with a Cosmopolitan Aim: A Critical Guide, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Rossi P.J. (1998), “Public Argument and Social Responsibility: The Moral Dimensions of Citizenship in Kant’s Ethical Commonwealth,” [in:] Autonomy and Community: Readings in Contemporary Kantian Social Philosophy, J. Kneller, S. Axinn (eds.), State University of New York, Albany: 63–85.
Schneewind J. (1998), The Invention of Autonomy, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Sullivan R.J. (1989), Immanuel Kant’s Moral Theory, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Sullivan R.J. (1994), An Introduction to Kant’s Ethics, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Tampio N. (2014), “Pluralism in the Ethical Community,” [in:] Kant’s Religion within the Boundaries of Mere Reason: A Critical Guide, G. Michalson (ed.), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge: 175–192.
Timmermann J. (ed.) (2009), Kant’s Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals: A Critical Guide, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Tomaszewska A. (2016), “Kant’s Reconception of Religion and Contemporary Secularism,” Roczniki Filozoficzne 64 (4): 125–148.
Wood A.W. (1999), Kant’s Ethical Thought, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Wood A.W. (2011), “Ethical Community, Church and Scripture,” [in:] Die Religion innerhalb der Grenzen der bloßen Vernunft, O. Höffe (ed.), Akademie Verlag, Berlin: 131–150.
Yovel Y. (1980), Kant and the Philosophy of History, Princeton University Press, Princeton.