RELIGION "private affairs" or "public affairs"? 
(Max Adler)
Philosophy, religion and politics nell'austromarxismo
Thomas La Rocca (University of Ferrara)
Privatsache Religion is well known that was the motto of Liberals settecentschi
and nineteenth century, made their own, subsequently, socialist workers' movement by
for the first time in the Congress of German Socialists
in Gotha in 1875 as "anticlerical flag", then
formally made official in the founding congress of the Austrian Social Democratic Party
(Heinfeld 0.1889-90) and immediately later, Congress adopted
even the Social Democratic Party German (Erfurt,
1891). From then on it became the flag of the line
policy of all other parties and social movements. It was a formula,
though, and nothing more, with which they still raised the concept
secular state, which is typical of liberalism, and suggested the movement
worker, at best an abandonment of anti
and an attitude of respect, in terms of tolerance and indifference towards religion
.
Only since the beginning of the twentieth century, especially by two thinkers
austromarxisti Max Adler (1873-1937) and Otto Bauer (1882 -
1938), the formula becomes the object Privatsache Religion
a more serious study and a fuller debate. We can say, in general, and
schematically, that the first
disclose the philosophical interpretation and gives it a more cultural significance
wide, the second it provides the historical foundation and gives it a political opening
different and broader than the
traditional Marxist critique of religion and respect to the narrow vision
anticlerical movements and socialist parties. Religion Privatsache assumes, in the first
, the value of its foundational concept of philosophy of religion,
and in the second, the scope of a more appropriate and decisive
strategy for resolving the "question religion ", understood in its various aspects
: cultural, social and political.
briefly illustrate the position of Adler and then that of Bauer.
I. Max Adler: Religion Privatsache
fact of consciousness and inner self
Adler will outline the position of the comparison with Marx, Engels and Marxism
classic, highlighting the latest news from Adler, that many appear
provocation, even heresy. Two new on-
2
which I will discuss: a) the a priori nature of religion in the face of
concept "historical" historical materialism of Marx, b) the nature
"existential" religious alienation in the face of nature storicosocio
-economic work of Marx's alienation.
is known that for the fathers of Marxism, religion is a form of ideology
historical produced by a specific practical way of life of men,
a form of consciousness that is externally induced, the socio-economic
society.
For Max Adler, Marxist, which moves in the wake of Kant, religion is, instead
, a priori of man's consciousness, not something that comes
consciousness from the outside, but something that originates in the consciousness
itself. In other words, Marx's ideas of God and eternal life if
heavenly man makes for induction from the outside of the creator god
the figure of the master from which the total work depends
in his being, in his daily existence of worker's paradise that
by 'desire for liberation from the alienated condition of this
earthly life. For Adler, however, the ideas of God and the beyond
man has them already before any experience, regardless
factors and ways to feel the economic and social. Religion, therefore, originally and essentially
Adler is an individual matter interiore1. Here
not having enough time to resume consideration of the entire
Adler on the concept of religion, I will indicate only the dock for his
research.
alienation between religion and salvation
Adler actually does not ignore all the criticism of Marx and Marxism
traditional religion is that the historical alienation, that is
expression of the real conditions of extreme socio-economic
man: but he believes that, before becoming
factor expression and historical alienation, religion is originally
expression of existential alienation:
expression of the contradiction between the natural physical world (the world of Wissen) and moral
human world (the world of Wollen) and within the latter between Morale and Happiness.
Man, that is, living in a world in which nature follows its own laws
universal, necessary, immutable, and therefore laws that are
also indifferent and oblivious to the fate of a single man. Adler leads
examples. It contains only one: A stone that falls, following
the law of universal gravitation, do not care if it ends in head
a passerby, causing death, a volcano becomes active
according to natural laws, with the flooding its lava fields and villages, is
1 See M. Adler, Del critical concept of religion, philosophy of religion, edited by T. La Rocca,
Cadmus Editions, Florence 1992, pp.179-221
3
heedless of the damage it can cause to the surrounding nature, the
plantations and inhabitants of the area. We could add other examples of current
: hurricanes, the zumami of recent times, the ozone hole
atmosphere. Similarly, a moral level, the unbeatable man lives
another contradiction, the contradiction of a Kantian
universal moral law which, like that of natural physical forces
without condition (with the "Thou shalt" CI Time),
ignoring the happiness of individuals. As the saying goes: "The sun shines on
good as the bad guys." At times
observance of moral law can lead to humiliation and misery for the individual
individual, and often his transgression
often is rewarded by good fortune. Between the two worlds, natural and human, and within
same as human, so there is a contradiction, a fracture incurable.
A condition, this, that one of the most careful scholars of thought
Adler, Peter Heintel, with some effectiveness, characterized as the true
alienation, which always accompanies human life, more radical, even
, that historical and social Marx2. But this rift
man experiences it, live it, but not the acceptable,
worth the madness. A world cosiffatto is a non-sense, while
man is searching for meaning, a sense of the world and history and also
your personal destiny in the world. How we can emerge
then? It can only leave for "religious way." Only religion can
reconstruct, heal the rift. Adler arrives - again by Kant -
even considering it 's essential
decisive liberation of man, to overcome that fundamental contradiction of the two worlds
unrelated, even contradictory, even fractured. How can
religion as this release? By the assumption of
a higher order, it becomes possible unity of the physical world and the ethical
, the unity of nature and moral world of knowledge (Wissen)
and that of the willing (Wollen). Religion, therefore, as a supposition, conjecture
a significant totality -
represented by the idea of \u200b\u200bGod - which allows the full comprehension of the world. And it is,
the same time, the "assumption of an undying spirit world" -
represented in the idea of \u200b\u200bimmortality of the soul - that saves
the fate of individual men and satisfy their thirst for life and
to be happy.
In other words - and more succinctly - Adler
defines the concept of God as the principle, "the axiom of reason in the world."
subjective supposition and necessary, without which man "should
despair of life" and without whom this would prove "an unparalleled folly
" 3. This means that, for the Marxist Neo-Kantian Adler, the
Heintel 2, Peter,
3 Max Adler, Del critical concept of religion, cit., Pp.205-206
4
religious ideas are not ideas of God and knowledge of '
immortality of the soul in the sense that they do not lead
affirmation of the existence of these realities, but are transcendental ideas, scrolls, postulated
storage conditions
spiritual unity of man.
In this light, religion is to assume, then, its true meaning
re-abiding (from the Latin religio) report, in the human
union of these two otherwise irreconcilable worlds: the world of nature and
moral world and at the same time union of virtue and happiness.
Adler sums up her concept as follows: "
religion is not a doctrine in the sense of dogmatic religions [...], but a
motion of our consciousness" 4.
short, a religion as a worldview, vision and total unit
the world that Adler did not hesitate more, at this point, calling it simply
philosophy. Adler writes:
"religion and philosophy are only two paths to the same inner
goal [...] are only two expressions for the solution of the same
problem: understanding the meaning of the whole unit
of the world" 5. From
religion "private" religion in "public"
Religion cosiffatta, Adler characterizes as Privatsache, ie
as a religion of conscience, mainly as
experience the unity of man with the world, of which he is a part,
report as entirely subjective and man's personal with the world,
by which he "proves the consolation of being linked to everything."
So it is also a religion that takes different forms depending on the particular characteristics of the individuals
. How to say Feuerbachians:
is the man who created god, and each man creates his god and
remains in solitary and personal relationship with him. Still, Adler states, in this isolation
inner man is not alone, because this need
religious interests "thousands of souls", thousands of people since
"the same need, the same condition life and formation,
the same interests then they come out,
within a particular social group, religion as a personal interpretation
essentially identical
personal relationship with the world "6.
4 Ibid, p.206
5 Ibid, p.218 6
religion a private matter, in philosophy of religion, cit., P.254. 5
That religion is the same, so common to hear of individuals who
external course in common ways of behavior,
expresses itself in outward forms of worship and therefore
in organized forms of religious communities. And when it comes to these forms of expressions
external social, religion follows the historical destiny of all things of this
world, that is the fate of what he calls Sünderfall
der Gesellschaft, the company's fall into sin, as specified "in the fall
social dialectics," a phrase to mean the fall in
logic and practice of class. So the religion, religions
better take on the characteristics of ideologies
class carriers. Typical of this is the interpretation of Christianity provides
Adler, that ideology of the poor and the oppressed peoples
gradually becomes
ideology of the ruling classes, organization of power, to prevail under
this last form. As that Christianity is not religion, but only
church. Ed Adler for the church and religion do not match.
And against a religion become so, that is, religion and power
class, there is no other alternative but to undertake a Kulturkampf als
Klassenkampf. A Kulturkampf that is intended, namely, to counteract
not to religion as such, as Privatsache original
unified Weltanschauung of the world, but as a religion "public" appearance
, understood both as a confessional state religion, which religion is
Church organized into a church of power, which are often
were, by contrast, separation factors, sometimes causes
even wars of religion. What also makes us exclaim to Adler, as the Latin poet Lucretius Carus
, "Suad religio potuit quantum malorum no!"
"how many atrocities he was unable to push their religion!"
Today we are also the protagonists of many aberrations
made in the name of religion, best produced by religious fanaticism of any
color and latitude.
If this has hitherto been the fate of historical religion, should not
surprise, then, the final conclusion of Adler, 'historiography
teaches that the path of liberation, external and internal, earthy and soul
[ie as a religion of consciousness] does not pass through the church. " Conclusion
completely opposite to that already seen in regard to religion
Privatsache, named as the only path to liberation from the existential alienation
namely the radical break between nature and man.
Located here is one inevitable question: If religion is not Privatsache
been and can not be implemented in the historical religions and churches, and
if, on the other hand, it is presented as a decisive element of libration
man, where and how can it be implemented? 6
I leave that question hanging for discussion. How do I leave suspended
other questions such as: How is the position of the Adler religion
outlined above with his profession of allegiance to Marxism?
Quanta and which also retains relevance for today's Adler
critical reflection on religion?
II. Religion in Privatsache Otto Bauer
religious issue as a matter of policy
Even Otto Bauer, about the topic in question, taken as the key to
Privatsache Religion als, but in a more directly political
as a principle of state secularism,
the separation of church and state. I report on two important novelties specific
of his speech on religion:
1) the discovery of the origin of the religious formula Privatsache Religion;
2) the translation of the religious question of "social issues"
(if religion helps or hinders the socialism) to "issue
democratic" (if religion helps or hinders
democracy more generally, that the civil liberties of all ).
About the first point, the religious origin, I will just say that Bauer,
comes with an interesting historical overview to highlight
a historical truth self-evident, but lost sight of in the course of time, or even distorted
: nature originally
religious claim of separation of church and state. Bauer makes it back,
fact, at the beginning revolutionary religious movement of the German Baptists
the first half of the 500, which, by the motto evangelical
"my kingdom not of this world," claimed consistently
freedom from the constraints of church-state politicians. From the German Baptists
this claim of the '500 then passed on to the British
Battisti 600,
particularly active in the revolution of Cromwell, who also strongly demanded the selfsame
freedom of religion and state and freedom of the church from any constraint
statale7.
from England to the formula of separation of church-state
is exported to America, with migration British
of the Pilgrim Fathers (Congregationalists, Baptists and Quakers). It is here that, in the second half
the seventeenth century, it is realized for the first time,
7 insisted on religion as a matter of individual conscience, that inner personal relationship with God
: "religion is the most intimate of ' individual 'There, D.280. 7
precisely due to the Baptist Roger Williams (Rhoe Island) and the Quaker William Penn
(in Pennsylvania).
And in the next century, with the release of the American colonies from England
(1787), the separation of church and state comes even
part of the Constitution of the new Member USA.
From then on, in America the state is a state non-religious in the sense that
not profess any religion in particular, we assume no
as the official state religion, and at the same time recognizes and guarantees freedom of religion
any church or religious association.
These results - Bauer is at pains to point out - "a great religious movement
'separation of church and state, in the United States
," was not a victory dell'atesimo on religion, but religious victory
[ ...] against violent conscience ..
[win] the power of coercion of the state and the church
"8. While
, meanwhile, in Europe, the separation of church and state
became a workhorse of the Enlightenment bourgeois liberals, but, unlike
the United States, was used as a means to attack and eliminate
religion and mortify church, depriving,
precisely, its secular arm, and thus blunting its power of influence
.
So in America, the advocacy of separation between state and church
was conducted by the Puritan religious requirement for religious
in Europe, the Enlightenment liberal "as a means of struggle against religion
" 9. That is, the two historical subjects (the Puritans religious and liberal Enlightenment)
which have the same goal - the separation of church and state
- had, however, different and opposite reasons:
freedom of conscience and faith for some, the fight to the church and religion
for others.
"religious issue" as "issue of democracy"
since the discovery of the origin of the religious principle of separation of church and state
and its process of secularization of the clarification
Bauer about his concept of Religion Privatsache
as a criterion for a correct political strategy of socialism in
against the religious question.
In light of this, in explicit criticism against liberalism and Marxist
traditional and in tune, though - paradoxically
8 Ibid, p.282.
9 Ibid. 8
for a Marxist - with that of religious movements, the Religion Privatsache
Bauer is not a ploy to artificially
to resolve the religious issue, but as a principle that underlies,
than that of the broader democratic freedoms, including the
religious freedom itself.
The starting point for Bauer to do this double issue of freedom,
political and religious importance, is the view of the situation
Austria of his time, he saw a practice characterized by
Compromise between church and state, by the alliance of church and the bourgeoisie,
ie a sort of co-management of power, which on one hand
conditioned the policy choices and kept locked democracy, and
the other at the same time, remained limited even religious freedom.
A situation in which the state gives up sovereignty to share
of the church, recognizing exclusive privileges (fair to the priests,
religious teaching in public schools, the Concordat
also recognized civil marriage) is not granted to other social subjects, in
change in reaction to their counterparts in terms of parties and government
support for state policy, make sure
through his great power of influence in society and the church, for its part,
in order to obtain, maintain and enhance its privileges, leaving impose "heavy
rights" to veto any candidate Austrian
Papal election, to control the appointment of bishops and
power to interfere in the administration of ecclesiastical property
Particular emphasis placed Bauer on how to control the church on
consciences of the faithful in order to direct it for political convenience .
control it exerts a pressure by means of ideological
present himself as atheist, then opposed and incompatible
with the Christian religion, the materialistic view of the Socialist Party
proletarian. In this way, thousands and thousands of workers and small and medium
bourgeois classes, who would go to class interest and would fight willingly
the ranks of the socialist labor movement, is holding them back
not to "betray" their religious conscience.
In this way, according to Bauer, the church prevents the expression
free democratic society, blocking and anti-socialist
conservative positions on a large part of the social classes
decisive for one or the other majority.
Then, the true democratic freedom can be reached, he concludes Bauer,
only when the church will free these social classes from the constraints of conscience.
What will be possible only when it will assume a position of neutrality
policy and allow its faithful to orient themselves in politics
freely according to their interests and their beliefs. Neutra-9
quality that can only be done when certain conditions occur,
including primarily the following:
- the expropriation of the physical assets of the church, the defense of which is the real reason of his
alliance interests with the ruling class, now
with the bourgeoisie, as in the past with the ruling classes from time to time.
Practice flexibility and adaptation to the power that effectively
Bauer expressed in terms of a law of history "is
fate of the Church to always against the enemies of yesterday's tomorrow
Friends'
10 - The second condition is the separation of church and state, we
said. Obviously
Bauer knows that the church no matter the neutrality
because it should continue to defend or claimed as
inalienable rights, the possession of their property, the preservation of its privileges
el'elargizione of state services in their favor
, it also knows that - without exception - will oppose the requests for separation
of Church and State, regardless of the negative effects of this
position on the democratic life of the states and the real religious life
of its faithful, whose consciousness has no qualms, in fact, to manipulate
, indicating the guidelines and determining policy choices contrary
to their real class interests. But
Bauer reiterated that people will come to force the church to
neutrality. This is not anti-religious struggle for ideological reason, but for one reason
primarily and fundamentally political: to restore
a condition of democratic freedom, to which the church opposes
, in reality, not for religious reasons, but economic and political , it
is careful not to state explicitly, hiding them, however,
thoroughly ideological in the guise of defending the faith
against the atheistic materialism of socialism.
The most appropriate way to achieve this goal of political neutrality
of the church and religious neutrality of the state is not, however, the Kulturkampf,
ideological struggle because anticlerical counterproductive strategy,
that threatens to take away from workers who believe socialism
and to expel those who believe that workers have already joined the
socialism. Most appropriate approach to social, that builds on
class interests of workers. Position similar to that of Karl Renner,
but opposite to that of Max Adler.
This in a nutshell, the question of religion in terms of esseziali
Otto Bauer, who did not generally differ from those reported
10 Social Democracy, Religion and Religious in the Church as a private affair, cit., P.220.
one from another great thinker
contemporary neo-Marxist contemporary Italian, Antonio Gramsci, in which there are close affinities than that
on political thought in general, including on the question of religion.
Privatsache Religion as a principle of freedom given by Bauer
setting the religious question, since
outlined here, leads to the conclusion that the Privatsache Religion is not, So
in its meaning - as it is not even in that of Max Adler
- a formula for limiting religious freedom, as if religion were to be reduced to
expressed only in the consciousness
individual and not in the public, social,
in the formation of free societies or associations with their own religious doctrines,
rituals and even public demonstrations. The formula Privatsache
Religion is opposed by the Bauer
Staatskirche (als Staatskirchensystem-official state church) to indicate,
fact, a religion as opposed to a free church religion
not free, because the bound state system, controlled
state, which controls the appointment of the popes, bishops, takes you,
requires the teaching of the Catholic religion for all, the law requires
ecclesiastical double and sometimes even require the confession
the state religion, under the Royal eius religio principle deceased:
obligation to profess the religion of the king of the place where you live. Bauer
mean the Religion Privatsache positivimanente
as the principle of true and genuine freedom of religion, is for any individual
that any religious community in a non-denominational
, before which all citizens and all the associations ,
be they political, cultural and religious, are all equal, no one
privileges at the expense of others.
Any political force, and therefore the Socialists, who intends to make
a fully democratic society, should, therefore, set
religious policy based on this principle, very simple but of great
ideal, cultural and political, because it allows
maximum individual and collective expression of religious ideas and practices
.
Therefore, contrary to popular belief - Bauer
to keep us out - in a society in which the principle of Religion Privatsache
is where religion can find the ideal conditions for its
operation and development, even the best and biggest in the states
confessional.
Obviously, in a democratic society, freedom of thought and expression
is not closed to any worldview, whether religious
that of a different or opposite. So there must be recog-nised
1
the same right of existence and expression
to other philosophies, maybe at odds with religion, and you will be entitled
action and advocacy organizations and other groups who might argue
and fight against the religious. And if
of believers will be convinced of the validity of new scientific ideas and abandon
traditional religion, or vice versa, this
is part of the dialectical play of a free democratic society, politically and culturally
free
always preferable to any form of coercion of conscience, were in force in denominational churches and
state, where perhaps the state imposes its own religion and the church
use of instruments of state coercion to impose their ideas and
to enforce its precepts.
Also on this position could be the
Bauer many comments and questions, first about what the 'current
Religion Privatsache of its proposal for the situations of today. Reference
these observations during the discussion.
References:
Max Adler, Philosophy of Religion, edited by T. La Rocca,
Cadmus Editions. Fiesole-Firenze 1992
Max Adler, Lectures on Christianity, edited by T. La Rocca, Course Books, 1997
Ferrara Otto Bauer, Religion as a private affair, edited by T. La Rocca,
Cadmus Editions, 2001 Florence-Fiesole
24-25-26/09/2010 - Sports Center "Molinelli," Mazzo di Rho (MI) - The KSD had the great pleasure of hosting a seminar conducted by the Masters Shigeaki INOUE, 8th Dan Hanshi, and Yutaka ASAMI, 8th Dan Kyoshi. The event began on Friday evening with a welcome jigeiko and continued on Saturday and Sunday with a stage. Adherence was high and the Masters have proposed a comprehensive program and have certainly contributed in the first person to create that beautiful jovial atmosphere that is breathed in the building. Thanks to Gigi and friends of Rigolio Kenzan Dojo Gallarate for the cooperation and support, thanks to Livio Lancini and all the other Masters present, thanks to all participants for giving us the opportunity to spend a beautiful weekend full of good kendo, but above all thanks ..... Sensei !!!!! 8-) 
(Max Adler) 
