Charles Montesquieu’s political ideas on religion, power, and moderation
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18012/arf.v13i1.78747Palavras-chave:
Montesquieu, religion, Enlightenment, political moderation, libertyResumo
This article reinterprets Charles Montesquieu’s conception of religion not as a peripheral theme in his political philosophy, but as a structural element of his broader reflection on power, law, and liberty. Against readings that portray Montesquieu either as a cautious defender of religious tradition or as an early secularist, this study argues that his position is better understood as a theory of moderation. For Montesquieu, religion is neither a transcendent truth to be imposed nor a mere illusion to be eliminated. It is a social force whose political significance depends on its relationship with institutions, customs, and forms of government. Through a close textual analysis of The Spirit of the Laws and Persian Letters, this article identifies three interconnected dimensions of Montesquieu’s understanding of religion: its moral function, its political ambivalence, and its susceptibility to historical variation. Religion can cultivate civic virtues, but it can also legitimize despotism. It can stabilize societies, but it can also radicalize them. These tensions are not anomalies in Montesquieu’s thought; they are its very foundation. By reconstructing Montesquieu’s reflections on religion within his broader theory of liberty, this article shows how his work anticipates contemporary debates on pluralism, secularism, and the limits of political authority. Rather than offering a doctrine of religious truth, Montesquieu provides a political anthropology of belief, one that remains strikingly relevant in an age marked by both religious resurgence and secular anxiety.
Downloads
Referências
Bandoch, J. (2016). Montesquieu’s selective religious intolerance in Of the Spirit of the Laws. Political Studies, 64(2), 351–367. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1111/1467-9248.12174
Castro, G. J., Olivieri, A. G., & de Lacerda Castro, L. (2025). A teoria política de Montesquieu: As visões da história e o estado de natureza. Revista Processus de Estudos de Gestão, Jurídicos e Financeiros, 16(51), e511493. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17398555
Cohler, A. M. (2021). Montesquieu's comparative politics and the spirit of American constitutionalism. University Press of Kansas. https://byvn.net/UJI1
Edwards, J. (2007). Enlightenment, law and nature: Montesquieu and Rousseau. In The radical attitude and modern political theory (pp. 63–93). Palgrave Macmillan UK. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230800908_4
Fanaticism, T. (2023). Montesquieu's restrained approach. In Fanaticism and the history of philosophy. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781032128207-9
Gilmore, N. K. (2022). Montesquieu and the spirit of Rome. Liverpool University Press. https://www.liverpooluniversitypress.co.uk/doi/abs/10.3828/9781802070248
Krause, S. R. (2005). Two concepts of liberty in Montesquieu. Perspectives on Political Science, 34(2), 88–96. https://doi.org/10.3200/PPSC.34.2.88-96
Krause, S. R. (2023). Political sovereignty in Montesquieu. In The Cambridge companion to Montesquieu (pp. 162–181). Cambridge University Press. https://byvn.net/T6uk
Manent, P. (2017). Montesquieu and the separation of powers. In Charles-Louis de Secondat, Baron de Montesquieu (pp. 443–454). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315095813
Mehmood, S. (2022). The impact of presidential appointment of judges: Montesquieu or the Federalists? American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, 14(4), 411–445. https://doi.org/10.1257/app.20210176
Meints-Stender, W. (2024). Understanding political change with Montesquieu. In What kind of government? Rethinking contemporary forms of government after the break in tradition (pp. 131–140). Springer Nature Switzerland. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-61171-1_8
Ming, C. (2025). Science and religion in Montesquieu’s thought: The scientific foundation of the religious Enlightenment. Chinese Studies in History, 58(4), 262–282. https://doi.org/10.1080/00094633.2025.2570073
Oake, R. B. (1953). Montesquieu's religious ideas. Journal of the History of Ideas, 548–560. https://doi.org/10.2307/2707701
Petersen, F. (2023). Montesquieu and the concept of the non-arbitrary state. The European Legacy, 28(1), 25–43. https://doi.org/10.1080/10848770.2022.2106638
Rahe, P. A. (2009). Montesquieu and the logic of liberty: War, religion, commerce, climate, terrain, technology, uneasiness of mind, the spirit of political vigilance, and the foundations of the modern republic. Yale University Press. https://byvn.net/OUV8
Rasch, W. (2016). Political theology and political form: Power, contingency, authority, belief. Journal for Cultural Research, 20(3), 217–234. https://doi.org/10.1080/14797585.2016.1141830
Resnick, P. (1987). Montesquieu revisited, or the mixed constitution and the separation of powers in Canada. Canadian Journal of Political Science/Revue canadienne de science politique, 20(1), 97–115. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0008423900048964
Schaub, D. (2017). Of believers and barbarians: Montesquieu’s enlightened toleration. In Charles-Louis de Secondat, Baron de Montesquieu (pp. 471–493). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315095813
Spector, C. (2023). Montesquieu. In Handbook of the history of the philosophy of law and social philosophy: Volume 1: From Plato to Rousseau (pp. 249–257). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-19542-6_33
Starobinski, J. (2024). Montesquieu. Seuil.
Yoon, K. (2023). Oriental despotism and the limits of doux commerce, from Montesquieu to Raynal. Political Theory, 51(3), 456–480. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/00905917221134718
Zahra, A., Charisma, C. A. T., Azaby, M. A. R., & Fadilah, S. N. (2022). Teori pemisahan kekuasaan Trias Politica dalam pemikiran filsafat hukum Montesquieu. Praxis: Jurnal Filsafat Terapan, 1(01). https://journal.forikami.com/index.php/praxis/article/view/533
Arquivos adicionais
Publicado
Como Citar
Edição
Seção
Licença
Este trabalho está licenciado sob uma licença Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Política de Direito Autoral para os itens publicados pela Revista:
1.Esta revista é regida por uma Licença da Creative Commons aplicada a revistas eletrônicas. Esta licença pode ser lida no link a seguir: Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0).
2.Consonante a essa politica, a revista declara que os autores são os detentores do copyright de seus artigos sem restrição, e podem depositar o pós-print de seus artigos em qualquer repositório ou site.
Política de Direito de Uso dos Metadados para informações contidas nos itens do repositório
1. Qualquer pessoa e/ou empresa pode acessar os metadados dos itens publicados gratuitamente e a qulquer tempo.
2.Os metadados podem ser usados sem licença prévia em qualquer meio, mesmo comercialmente, desde que seja oferecido um link para o OAI Identifier ou para o artigo que ele desceve, sob os termos da licença CC BY aplicada à revista.
Os autores que têm seus trabalhos publicados concordam que com todas as declarações e normas da Revista e assumem inteira responsabilidade pelas informações prestadas e ideias veiculadas em seus artigos, em conformidade com a Política de Boas Práticas da Revista.
