| Part of a series on |
| John Locke |
|---|
| Social contract Limited government Tabula rasa State of nature Right to property Labor theory of property Lockean proviso |
| Works (listed chronologically) |
|
A Letter Concerning Toleration Two Treatises of Government |
| People |
| Robert Filmer Thomas Hobbes 1st Earl of Shaftesbury David Hume Jean-Jacques Rousseau Adam Smith Immanuel Kant Thomas Jefferson |
| Related topics |
| Empiricism Classical liberalism Polish Brethren |
A Letter Concerning Toleration by John Locke was originally published in 1689. Its initial publication was in Latin, though it was immediately translated into other languages. Locke's work appeared amidst a fear that Catholicism might be taking over England, and responds to the problem of religion and government by proposing religious toleration as the answer. This "letter" is addressed to an anonymous "Honored Sir": this was actually Locke's close friend Philipp van Limborch, who published it without Locke's knowledge.[1]
Contents |
Locke argues for a new understanding of the relationship between religion and government. One of the founders of Empiricism, Locke develops a philosophy that is contrary to the one expressed by Thomas Hobbes in Leviathan, primarily because it supports toleration for various Christian denominations. That being said, it is important to recognize that Hobbes allowed for individuals to maintain their own religious beliefs as long as they outwardly expressed those of the state.
Unlike Hobbes, who saw uniformity of religion as the key to a well-functioning civil society, Locke argues that more religious groups actually prevent civil unrest. Locke argues that civil unrest results from confrontations caused by any magistrate's attempt to prevent different religions from being practiced, rather than tolerating their proliferation. Locke's primary goal is to "distinguish exactly the business of civil government from that of religion." He makes use of extensive argument from analogy to accomplish his goal, and relies on several key points. He wants to persuade the reader that government is instituted to promote external interests, relating to life, liberty, and the general welfare, while the church exists to promote internal interests, i.e., salvation. The two serve separate functions, and so, must be considered to be separate institutions.
For Locke, the only way a Church can gain genuine converts is through persuasion and not through violence. This relates to his central conclusion, namely, that the government should not involve itself in care of souls. In support of this argument he presents three main reasons: (1) individuals, according to Locke, cannot divest control over their souls to secular forces, as God does not appoint the magistrate; (2) force cannot create the change necessary for salvation, because while it can coerce obedience, it cannot change one's beliefs; and (3) even if coercion could persuade someone of a notion, it would not help for the salvation of the soul, because then birth would be related with salvation.
Locke argued that atheists should not be tolerated because 'Promises, covenants, and oaths, which are the bonds of human society, can have no hold upon an atheist'. The Roman Catholic Church can not be tolerated either, according to Locke, because 'all those who enter into it do thereby ipso facto deliver themselves up to the protection and service of another prince'. If this Church were tolerated, a magistrate would have to abide by the settling of a 'foreign jurisdiction' in his own country and see its followers 'listed, as it were, for soldiers against his own Government'.
There is, however, a passage added in a later edition of the Essay concerning Human Understanding, where Locke perhaps questions "whether 'atheism' was necessarily inimical to political obedience."[2]
Toleration is central to Locke's political philosophy. Consequently, only churches that teach toleration are to be allowed in his society. Locke’s view on the difficulty of knowing the one true religion may suggest that religion is not personally important to Locke. As an empiricist, he took practical considerations into account, such as how the peace of civil society will be affected by religious toleration. However, a closer reading of the text reveals that Locke relies on Biblical analysis at several key points in his argument, as does study of his spiritual life, mainly influenced by Deism, a belief in which God does not intervene in human affairs.
There we