What were some of the arguments made on behalf of both tolerance and intolerance in the

Early Modern period? Explain why these two were not mutually exclusive in practice.

Religion or theology, in general, may look to be one of the quite areas of life. However,

contrary to our expectation, it is faced with various controversial instances. Unlike in the past,

where questions regarding religion were not many, nowadays, the questions regarding various

religious issues are many. One of the areas that have faced such controversial arguments is

religious tolerance and intolerance. Many religious, as well as theology scholars, have supported

each of their based on their evidence and believes. It is due to this continued arguments between

the two areas that this paper seeks to address some of the cases explicitly made by Benjamin J.

Kaplan and Grell, Ole Peter, Scribner and Bob authorships.

Religious tolerance refers to the state of tolerance displayed by people of specific religion

against acts or religious beliefs of another religion. Religious intolerance, on the other hand, is

the inability to intolerate the behaviors or specifically the beliefs or practices of another religion.

According to Benjamin J. Kaplan, religious intolerance can be experienced when a group of

people, society, religious group, the non-religious group refuses to respect and recognize the

religious freedom of another religion based on regional grounds. The issue of intolerance and

tolerance has brought controversial arguments in various spheres of life. Scholars such as

Benjamin J. Kaplan and Grell with his fellows have also contributed significantly to these

arguments by making their point of view stands out.

 The authors Benjamin J. Kaplan, Grell and their fellows, in their books, show their

points of view on the two controversial issues. The authors display a history of religious

tolerance and intolerance in the Early Modern period. According to Benjamin J. Kaplan, the

reformations experienced in the sixteen century were accompanied with religious divisions

which were quite different from the earlier experienced ones. First of all, they were regarded to

continental in scale. The Catholics authorities displayed religious intolerance. Catholic

authorities opposed the presence of Protestantism entirely in Europe. Countries that faced this

intolerance were Italy, Spain as well as Portugal.

On the other hand, the other countries namely England, Scotland, Denmark and Sweden,

the Republic of Netherlands which was then known as the republic of Dutch displayed religious

tolerance by adopting Protestantism as one of their religion while the other section of the

population continued to be catholic. Other countries, such as Germany and Switzerland,

experienced protestant-catholic instances. Furth more, according to Benjamin K. Kaplan,

Protestantism later formed other rival denominations such as the Lutheran, Anabaptist among

others. This displayed a form of religious intolerance hence destroying the religious unity that

was earlier enjoyed.

Some exceptional countries such as Hungary and France adopted an allegiance to a single

religious belief or religion that its population was not engaged in. Religious intolerance was

continuously displayed in the 17th century. For instance, in Britain, there was enormous pressure

that leads to the removal of the catholic monarch in power. As years went by the history of the

rise in religious tolerance did not lose its credibility. Benjamin J. Kaplan argues that similar

ideologies contribute to the emergence of tolerance. He further claims that it has circular or well
known as the self-confirming power. Religious tolerance provides the society with a chance

with which we can be able to judge the society we live in. The latter, in turn, assist in lending

moral weights that push for the embracement of more tolerance. However, the chauvinism

associated with tolerance may be paralyzing. According to Benjamin J. Kaplan view, nobody

wants to consider him or herself primitive, it prompts us to regard intolerance as someone else’s

vice.

Religious tolerance and intolerance had various repercussion. One challenge with

religious intolerance according to the book coexistence. Conflict and practice of toleration by

Benjamin J. Kaplan is that peace and harmony in society in the early modern era remained to be

an unstable achievement. It was quite tricky for people with different religious beliefs to live and

coexist together in unity. This was primarily because, religion has already integrated and

formed a more significant part of their political, social as well as cultural lives in their early

modern era. For the society to enjoy the peace, it relied on solving various issues such what

would powers and authorities of the government be shared? Which holidays could be celebrated

instead of the others? What kind of rights and freedoms would each religious groups have?

Among various issues. Intermarrying was quite tricky, according to the difference in religious

beliefs.

As one way of encouraging religious tolerance, Benjamin J. Kaplan supports his claims

by quoting Martin Luther words. Martin Luther claims that freedom of conscience does not free

people from performing their religious works. Likewise, Benjamin J. Kaplan says that, according

to Calvin articles, we are subject to God’s will. As one way of upholding this freedom, we are

hence required to direct all our life activities towards serving God. Religious intolerance is
further showed in the Benjamin book, where he shows the persecution of Anabaptists by the

Protestantism. The Protestants were fed with the religious deviance show. Religious tolerance

has also been displayed through the adoption of confessionalism. According to historical

evidence, as time went by, religious beliefs of Protestantism and Catholics change since no

religion is static. AS one way of accepting their religious flaws and immoral conducts. This

contributed to religious tolerance as people could understand that they also had challenges

individually in their specified religions. Benjamin J. Kaplan analyses religious intolerance and

tolerance based on the history of religious conflict in the early modern era. It exclusively

discusses the different sides of tolerance and intolerance through various religious instances.

Likewise Benjamin counterpart Grell and ole peter also showed their arguments

regarding the tolerance and intolerance of each other religious beliefs ad actions. Grell, Ole

Peter, Scribner, and bob are some of the greatest scholars who wrote about religious tolerance

during the European reformation era. Their views and claims have been significantly considered

important to the historical development of religious tolerance. This is evidenced by the

distortion of the monolithic structure of the then medieval western Christianity. Hence for the

first time, it presented a temporary lay as well as ecclesiastical rulers of the later period.

Furthermore, this disruption of these religious structures led to increased debates about different

aspects of religious tolerance, including freedom of conscience as well as the freedom of

worship. This contributed to the acceptance of religious tolerance.

 According to Ole peter Grell, tolerance in the early modern period was regarded as either

loser’s creed or religious beliefs perpetuated with religious, political as well as social aspects. It

is due to this reason that many of the religious people incline themselves to a form of religious

tolerance owing to protect it strongly due to some political reasons. Furthermore, these scholars

ole Peter Grell and Bob Scribner have corrected accepted theories related to the growth of

tolerance through the renaissances as well as the reformation. In their book, Ole peter Grell and

Scribner analyses and examines the different attitudes of specifically the protestant and churches

against other forms of religious groups. However, the primary opponent in the latter case is other

groups of Protestantism, although, in some instances, their attitudes were aimed at the

Catholicism. The overall impression of this condition is not new to anyone familiar with the

disputes that made Europe turn into a bloody ground for battles. These battles were continuously

experienced in the sixteen and seventieth century.

In his book, Ole peter shows vividly the kind of change that occurred to martin Luther

personally. Ole peters how’s us that, earlier on Luther stood on his claim that religion was a

matter of conscience including personal responsibility. This claim is similar to that of Benjamin

J. Kaplan. According to Martin Luther King, the application of force in various activities was not

justified. However, later on, he called upon the secular stronger authorities to address the issues

of blasphemy and seduction. As one way of addressing this issue, they turned into persecution of

the Anabaptists. Persecution continued to the late century. As it continued to worsen, it becomes

clear that some religious denominations that were backed up by strong political authorities were

intolerant to the society. They combined with their fellow sinners and secular powers to

persecute the offenders against issues such as true religion, minority churches while contrary to

the people's expectation argued for religious tolerance. Luther supported his stand by saying
that no local authorities were authorized to punish or fight the heresy by use of force. This was

mainly the purpose of the word.

A couple of years passed by and due to various factors such as political and social

accompanied by religious realities prompted Luther to limit original tolerance. This was not due

to the intense pressure mounted on him due to severe challenges from the more radicalized

European reformers. As time went by, these issues made Luther change his acts and accepts the

truth displayed by society. He recognized that his rigid distinction between the religious aspects,

namely: spiritual and temporal, could not be allowed in such examples of extreme moments.

Although blasphemy punished was seen to have severe repercussions on the peace and stability,

Luther had no otherwise than o accept the truth that, legal authorities had chipped in and

punished offenders.

As shown above, in the introduction, tolerance means bearing with another person

unpleasant behaviors. Currently, tolerance involves acknowledging the right of all religious

freedoms was quite different and far from the thoughts of the early modern period society. Bob

Scribner further shows his point of view by saying that, both early Lutheran, as well as Erasmian

notions of tolerance, seemed to be overridden in the era of early reformations. Bob Scribner

further goes ahead to display some of the different forms of tolerance exhibited in the sixteen

century. On the other, Diarmaid MacCulloch claims to stand on the four attitudes displayed by

the church towards the minority religious groups. In comparison to the way we understand it

today, religious freedom is seems to have place of origin. Hence we can conclude that first a and
also third chance of religious tolerance are as a result of an edge accorded to concord by

coercion.

The books uses various setting and characters to show the stands of the authors on both

tolerance and intolerance. The beginning chapter part of the book commences but showing three

types of test cases. One of the examples is a case that involves a woman being accused of

witchcraft. The second case surrounds the Jews and Marranos, while the third cases tests involve

religious dissent. From these instances, we can conclude that prior to the reformation at the early

modern era, critical legal institutions, as well as ideological convictions, had already tobe

established. This was aimed at enabling the mobilization of old resources and also the

advancement of new solutions. Hence this contributed to the rationality that prompted John

Locke to proclaim it as the foundation of modern, tolerant society.

Besides, Ole peter shows the tolerance grew as a result of significant contributions made

by various scholars. According to Ole peter, the most significant arguments were displayed by

Episcopius and Uytennbogert economic as well as political arguments. The two scholars favored

tolersim. They were against the religious intolerance displayed in various parts of Europe. They

gave examples of the consequences provinces such as Zeeland and Holland had experienced due

to persecution stimulated by the religious intolerance displayed by various religious

denominations. In their stand, they suggest that the primary cause of these notable instances is

due to the repression of Arminian and craftsmen’s. According to these town scholars, religious

tolerance would be beneficial to society economically and politically. Furthermore, the religious

tolerance seen today can be historically proven to the rise in the number of German-speaking
community that offers religious tolerance

In conclusion, the controversial state of religious intolerance and tolerance is not a

onetime affair that can be limited to a few historical moments. The progress of the society from a

religious intolerance one to a more and inclusive tolerant one was an ongoing process but still is

not stopping even today. Religious intolerance in the early modern era made it difficult for the

different denomination to coexist peacefully in the society. As time went by, people have been

able to identify, recognize, as well as respect each other’s rights and freedoms. The freedom of

worships, freedom of conscience are currently recognized and enjoyed by everyone in society.

Religious tolerance is currently highly experienced. Various religious denominations have been

formed, and people are respecting these different religious beliefs without interference due to the

upholding of each other’s respect. Religious tolerance can be said to be a significant contributor

to peaceful coexistence, political, and economic development in a society. Based on the

arguments displayed by the latter scholars, there are various arguments and suggestion about the

religious intolerance and tolerance since its emergence in the early modern era. However, it is

these arguments that contributed to the shaping of the current peaceful and more religious society

inclusive of different religious denominations and beliefs.

 Bibliography

Kaplan, Benjamin J. "Coexistence, conflict, and the practice of toleration." A companion to the
Reformation world (2004): 486.

Grell, Ole Peter, Robert W. Scribner, and Bob Scribner, eds. Tolerance and intolerance in the
European Reformation. Cambridge University Press, 2002.