Religious tolerance

Religious tolerance or religious toleration may signify "no more than forbearance and the permission given by the adherents of a dominant religion for other religions to exist, even though the latter are looked on with disapproval as inferior, mistaken, or harmful". Historically, most incidents and writings pertaining to toleration involve the status of minority and dissenting viewpoints in relation to a dominant state religion. However, religion is also sociological, and the practice of toleration has always had a political aspect as well.

An overview of the history of toleration and different cultures in which toleration has been practiced, and the ways in which such a paradoxical concept has developed into a guiding one, illuminates its contemporary use as political, social, religious, and ethnic, applying to LGBT individuals and other minorities, and other connected concepts such as human rights.

The term "tolerance" derives from the Latin tolerantia, meaning "endurance" or "the ability to bear." For Cicero, tolerantia was a personal virtue—the capacity to endure hardship, injustice, or misfortune with composure. By the sixteenth century the notion of tolerance began to take on a more political dimension, associated with maintaining peace and social concord amid religious conflict. This is seen in developments like the 1555 Peace of Augsburg, even though the term itself was not explicitly invoked. Over time, the concept evolved from mere forbearance—what John Horton describes as "putting up with" disapproved beliefs—toward a broader commitment to recognizing and respecting diversity.

The concept of tolerance is multifaceted, shaped by various academic disciplines including philosophy, sociology, political science, religious studies, and law. Tolerance research reveals a plurality of interpretations, each contingent upon specific social, political, and cultural contexts. In antiquity, Cicero’s notion of tolerantia emphasized endurance in the face of adversity. Early modern thinkers such as Baruch Spinoza, Pierre Bayle, and John Locke explored tolerance primarily in political terms.

By the 18th century, Moses Mendelssohn advocated for religious tolerance as a fundamental human right, a position later expanded by figures such as John Rawls, who framed tolerance as a virtue of justice, and Michael Walzer, who linked it to the necessity of pluralism.

Scholars such as John Horton, David Heyd, and Anna Galeotti have further debated whether tolerance inherently involves disapproval or can be redefined as recognition. Key conditions for the emergence of tolerance include power dynamics, social conflict, and normative disagreement. As Karl Popper famously asserted, tolerance must have limits to prevent its self-destruction, particularly in the face of intolerance. Contemporary research emphasizes that tolerance involves both rejection and acceptance, underscoring its normative and complex nature. Thus, the ambiguity and contextuality of tolerance present significant challenges in arriving at a unified definition.

Renaissance humanism emphasized individual dignity, critical thinking, and ethical living over religious dogma. Thinkers such as Erasmus and Jean Bodin promoted tolerance by valuing personal conscience and diversity of belief. Their approach resisted both Catholic and Protestant intolerance, favoring persuasion over coercion and rejecting harsh condemnations of heresy. Humanist ideals later influenced Jean-Jacques Rousseau, who argued that a humane society must support “the positive welcoming and prizing of human individuality”.

Liberalism, particularly through John Stuart Mill, expanded the idea of tolerance beyond religion to include political and cultural pluralism. Mill defended the necessity of free expression, even of offensive ideas, as a path to truth and societal benefit. John Rawls later developed the theory of political liberalism, grounding it in equality, fairness, and a shared public reason that all citizens could endorse regardless of personal beliefs. However, critics like Adam Seligman caution that liberal tolerance sometimes becomes “principled indifference,” privatizing difference rather than engaging with it. Together, humanism and liberalism created philosophical foundations for modern notions of tolerance by emphasizing respect, equality, and freedom of conscience.