Problems with Religion and Politics 363redouble their efforts. The Enlightenment ideas were dangerous not just
for morality, but also for the existing order. The actions of the king had be¬
gun to affect the pastors of the Prussian church long before, and he in¬
creased the pressure. Thus he formed in 1791 a committee to examine the
preachers' orthodox credentials (or their lack thereof). As might have been
expected, the majority of the committee were Rosicrucians. Given the zeal¬
ous persecution of rationalist preachers by Wöllner and his subordinates,
the situation became more and more tense. Few preachers were dismissed,
but the fear of reprisals from Berlin was significant, and it was not just the
preachers and pastors who came to feel the wrath of the king. Gedike and
Biester, the editors of the Berlinische Monatsschrift, the most important pub¬
lication propagating the Enlightenment in Germany and therefore much
hated by Wöllner and his cronies, had to move the journal outside Prussia
to Jena early in 1792.^132
In February of 1792, Kant sent to Biester an essay entitled "On Radical
Evil in Human Nature." He also asked Biester to send it to the Berlin of¬
fice of censorship. Even though this was not required, because the Monats¬
schrift was now published in Saxony, Kant wrote that he did not want to
create even the appearance of trying to "express so-called daring {kühn)
opinions only by consciously avoiding the Berlin censorship." The cen¬
sors let the essay pass. It appeared in the April issue. In June, Biester received
another essay from Kant, entitled "Of the Struggle of the Good Principle
with the Evil Principle for Sovereignty over Man." It was rejected. Hillmer,
who was responsible for moral matters in the bureau of censorship, had
allowed the first essay to be published because he thought it was written
for philosophers and not suitable for the public. But the second essay was
theological, or so it seemed to him. He therefore sent it to Hermes, who
rejected it.^133 Biester filed a complaint, but it was rejected. The article
seemed doomed — at least as long as Kant persisted in playing by the rules.
At the Easter Book Fair in Leipzig appeared a book with the title Cri¬
tique of All Revelation, published by Härtung in Königsberg. Since the book
appeared anonymously, the Allgemeine Literaturzeitung published a note in
which it found that anyone "who read even the most minor writings by
means of which the Königsberg philosopher has obtained the eternal grat¬
itude of mankind will immediately recognize the distinguished author of
this work." Kant reacted quickly and pointed out in a note of "correction,"
dated July 31, 1793, that he had not "the slightest part (schlichtesten An-
theil) in the work of this talented man," and that the author was "the can¬
didate of theology Mr. Fichte." He claimed that it was his "duty to leave