Moreover, since the exercise of religion is really the exercise of a natural right, that is, a determination of man’s natural “state of perfect freedom,” religion is a purely individual affair and therefore has no bearing on political life. 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. There are cases, he says, when churches exist of which the members “arrogate to themselves…some peculiar prerogative covered over with a specious show of deceitful words.”[33] As an example of such a church, Locke mentions one which holds “that faith is not to be kept with heretics” and “that kings excommunicated forfeit their crowns and kingdoms.”[34] Such a church interferes with civil affairs and therefore affairs that are outside the proper domain of religion. Here he says that prior to the existence of the state, men are in a state of nature, that is, “a state of perfect freedom to order their actions, and dispose of their possessions and persons, as they think fit, within the bounds of the law of nature, without asking leave, or depending upon the will of any other man.”[13] This “state of perfect freedom” belongs to all men equally, so that the state of nature is also a state of equality, “wherein all the power and jurisdiction is reciprocal, no one having more than another.”[14] Further, the “state of perfect freedom” is not unlimited but is bounded by the “law of nature,” which obliges every man to preserve himself and “teaches all mankind…that being all equal and independent, no one ought to harm another in his life, health, liberty, or possessions.”[15] In other words, since all men possess the freedom to dispose of themselves as they please equally, the only limit to one man’s exercise of that freedom, aside from not destroying himself, is not to hinder another man’s exercise of that same freedom. In the wake of the Protestant Reformation and religious persecution in England and Europe, Locke wrote a series of letters supporting toleration—his 1689 Letter Concerning Toleration, 1690 Second Letter Concerning Toleration, and 1692 Third Letter Concerning Toleration—in defense of religious tolerance from a Bible-based viewpoint. "John Locke's Letter Concerning Toleration (1689) is one of the most widely-read texts in the political theory of toleration, and a key text for the liberal tradition. [1] John Locke, on the other hand, took an apparently more benign position by calling not for the subjection of the Church to the state but for the total separation of the two powers. Later in the Letter, however, Locke implies that the practice of one’s religion is something more than that, namely, a natural right: These accusations [that assemblies of religious bodies are nurseries of factions and seditions] would soon cease if the law of toleration were once so settled that all Churches were obliged to lay down toleration as the foundation of their own liberty, and teach that liberty of conscience is every man’s natural right, equally belonging to dissenters as to themselves [emphasis added].[26]. Later, however, Locke makes it clear that there are other reasons which make the Catholic Church an exception to the rule of toleration. The following is the first part of a critique of John Locke’s Letter Concerning Toleration in the light of Catholic doctrine on the relation between Church and state. [20][21][22] Mark Goldie argues that the traditional interpretation of Locke's position on Catholics "needs finessing, since he did not, in fact, exclude the theoretical possibility of tolerating Catholics...if Catholics could discard their uncivil beliefs, they could then be tolerated". On the contrary, Pope Leo XIII teaches that the state is bound by divine law to engage in the “public profession of religion…not such religion as [men] may have a preference for, but the religion which God enjoins, and which certain and most clear marks show to be the only one true religion.”[5] Pope Pius IX condemns the proposition that “it has been wisely decided by law, in some Catholic countries, that persons coming to reside therein shall enjoy the public exercise of their own peculiar worship.”[6] Pope Pius XI declares that the “kingly dignity” of Christ “demands that the State should take account of the commandments of God and of Christian principles, both in making laws and in administering justice, and also in providing for the young a sound moral education.”[7] All of these papal pronouncements make it clear that the Lockean position on Church and state is irreconcilable with Catholic doctrine. Outline of John Locke’s “A Letter Concerning Toleration” • Early, simple way of Christian Church: The earliest manifestation of a “Christian Church” involved believers of Christ meeting to share information and to worship together (there were many different Jewish … Therefore, matters pertaining to salvation are wholly outside of the magistrate’s jurisdiction. If a church, as far as the state is concerned, is nothing but a voluntary society of men, then its claim to toleration cannot be based on a claim that it is of divine origin and must be accorded freedom as a requirement of divine law; rather, such a claim must be based solely on the church’s status as a free society whose affairs do not jeopardize civil affairs and on the natural right of men to profess whatever religion they choose. Thomas Hobbes and Benedict Spinoza held that the head of state ought to be the head of the Church, since otherwise the citizens’ loyalties would be divided. Every one may do as he likes, so long as he lets others do as they like. A close reading of the text also reveals that Locke relies on Biblical analysis at several key points in his argument. Locke seems to be implying that the freedom to practice the religion which one’s conscience judges to be acceptable to God is really a particular determination or expression of man’s natural “state of perfect freedom.” In other words, man’s natural freedom to dispose of himself as he pleases implies his freedom to practice the religion of his choosing. 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. [2][3] Throughout his life, Locke had taken an interest in the debate about religious toleration. Locke on toleration "John Locke's Letter Concerning Toleration (1689) is one of the most widely-read texts in the political theory of toleration, and a key text for the liberal tradition. This union lasted throughout Europe for twelve hundred years. These people, Locke argued, sought religious toleration "only until they have supplies and forces enough to make the attempt" on liberty. ), This page was last edited on 29 March 2020, at 00:20. What, for example, are the Church’s teachings on marriage, education, and economics if not teachings that pertain to civil affairs? The Josias Podcast, Episode XXVI: Historicism, The New Natural Law Theory as the Source of Bostock’s Error, Vital Error: Energy, Personalism, Pluralism, and the Triumph of the Will, Cajetan on the soul-body model of the relation of spiritual and temporal authority. His repeated condemnation of this state of affairs can make one think that the unjustness of using the state to kill and persecute one’s neighbors on account of religion is really what the Letter is all about. As Locke expresses in his Letter on Toleration, for the sake of the community a generally tolerant attitude is advised; however exceptions exist where there is too great a risk. [17] There are several texts in the Second Treatise of Government in which Locke speaks as though men leave the state of nature behind when they enter political society.