an ear­lier article [2] in which I argued that the basic principles of Kant's Critical philosophy and of Kant's own application of it to religion and theology are thoroughly consistent with a Christian way of thinking, acting and being. Perovich begins his reply with a fairly accurate summary of my "perspectival" method of interpreting Kant (pp.95 96). Unfortunately, when he describes my pro­posal as to how a perspectival interpretation of Kant can show the Christian philosopher a whole new way of responding to the Critical philosophy (pp.96 99), Perovich fails to portray my posi­tion quite so astutely; as a result, he is easily able to unveil problems which appear to be "fatal" (p.99) to my interpretation, supposedly rendering it "demonstrably wrong as an interpretation of Kant's views" (p.96). In this rejoinder I shall respond to such accusations by clarifying this aspect of my perspectival interpretation; in so doing, I will argue that the solution Perovich himself sug­gests as a "revision" of Kant (pp.99f) is in fact Kant's own position.