Zwischen Hinrichtung und Duldung

Abstract

Abstract The debates on toleration in the Confessional Age have not caught the interest of proponents of historical philosophy. Normally, they tend to locate the writings of Pierre Bayle or John Locke as the origins of modern philosophy. “Why?” one may ask. Perhaps the predominately religiously motivated discourse between theologians simply seems too remote. In this study, however, I attempt to demonstrate that a clear separation between theological and purely philosophical arguments was inconceivable in the 16th and 17th century. I will identify confessional differences in the debate on toleration and analyse the changes resulting from the religious and social transitions of the 17th century. In comparing Catholic, Reformed, Lutheran and Socinian views, the specific structural features of the confessions on the question of tolerating people of different faiths appear. Such a structural comparison demonstrates that the approach to the pressing issue of tolerating people of different faiths was not just based on personal attitudes, but on doctrine, whether of a theological or philosophical nature.