Early modern Europe was host to many large religions and religious groups including Catholicism, Protestantism, and even Islam in small numbers. There were many changes occurring in regards to religious toleration between the 16th and 18th centuries. Monarchs, intellectuals, and various councils alike had differing arguments and practices on whether or not it was ok to tolerate other religions.
Monarchs and similar leaders of kingdoms made arguments supporting their views on religious tolerance, but more often than not they used their authoritative power to instigate new practices. William, Prince of Orange and Archduke Matthias of Hapsburg, Protestant and Catholic leaders respectively, made an alliance that allowed religious tolerance in
…show more content…
order to strengthen their defense. “If we do not grant members of the Reformed Church freedom to exercise their religion…then our common enemy [Spain] will find it all the easier to harm us” (Doc. 2). The obvious intent of this alliance was to reduce the amount of Dutch internal religious feuding.
In 1598, King Henry IV of France created the edict of Nantes stating that “we permit to those of the Reformed religion to live and dwell in all cities and places of our Kingdom” (Doc. 5). By legalizing the Protestant group he aimed to lessen the inner turmoil of France, much like how Prince William and Archduke Matthias halted turmoil in the Netherlands. Although, almost a century later the Edict of Nantes was revoked by another French Monarch, King Louis XIV. “We forbid our subjects of the Protestant religion, to meet any more for the exercise of the said religion in any place or private house, under any pretext whatsoever.” (Doc. 8). Louis disagreed strongly enough with the edict of Nantes that he revoked it, showing direct opposition to past Monarchs. Lutheran King Charles XII spread his practice of religious tolerance to places he conquered. “In these places in Silesia where public practice of the Lutheran religion is prohibited, no one shall henceforth be prevented from performing religious observances peacefully and quietly in his own house for himself and his children” (Doc. 8). The differing opinions on religious …show more content…
tolerance resulted in it often being one of the first things modified after a change in leadership. The Austrian empress Maria Theresa was strongly opposed to religious intolerance, and as a result she presented her argument to her son and heir in order to warn him of the dangers of religious tolerance. “Toleration and indifference are precisely the true means of undermining everything” (Doc. 12). Control over religion in an area was sought to be something that could be held for generations. Although, document number 8, where King Louis XIV revokes the edict of Nantes, may not be entirely accurate. He is most likely writing this Edict of Fontainebleau in order to please a Catholic religious leader, possibly the Pope. King Louis XIV states he revokes the Edict of Nantes to help the people, because it will reduce violence if only one religion exists. This document is not reliable because he may be exaggerating the number of people who have already converted to Catholicism, or be exaggerating the benefits of zero religious tolerance. Religious leaders are not mentioned in this group of selected quotes. Their input would assist my argument by showing whether religious leaders were more inclined toward religious tolerance, or not. Intellectuals and theologians had different arguments and practices in mind when it came to religious toleration, most of which based their position on past experiences. Sebastian Castellio was a French Protestant that defected to Switzerland in order to avoid persecution. “Today there is scarcely one of our innumerable sects that does not look upon the rest as heretics” (Doc. 1). It is apparent that after being run out of his own country, he strongly disagrees with the idea of zero religious tolerance. Conversely, Paul Hay du Chastelet is a Catholic French aristocrat who has not been persecuted by his country. He writes that, “…unity of belief binds men together. Fellow subjects who pray to God in the same church and worship at the same altar will rarely fight each other” (Doc. 7). Voltaire, yet another French intellectual, saw benefits in religiously tolerant environment when he visited the Royal Exchange in London. “There the Jew, the Muslim, and the Christian transact business together, as though they all professed the same religion, and give the name of infidel only to bankrupts” (Doc. 11). After viewing what a place could be like with wide toleration of religions, he was convinced that was the best practice to uphold. However, the French aristocrat presented in document 7 may not be reliable as a source, because he is probably writing this in order to gain favor with the king of France, who at this time may be starting to consider revoking the Edict of Nantes. This grouping of quotes lacks the input of an intellectual originating somewhere other than France, perhaps the Netherlands or England. Their voice would be import to determine the views of people affected by varying degrees of religious intolerance, or lack thereof. Church councils and other groups volleyed diverse arguments and practices to people in power in order to get their voice heard.
The Synod of Middleburg, a Calvinist church council in the Netherlands came to a resolution stating the Christian cooperation was not necessary. “Regarding Christian love, it does not consist in having to tolerate every person in his disbelief without speaking against it or punishing him” (Doc. 3). The town council of Bautxen, Saxony worked to incorporate religious toleration by forming a contract between a Catholic and Lutheran church, forcing them accept each other. “And so the well-intentioned Catholic Church chapter, in response to repeated requests by municipal council to maintain good neighborly relations, Christian peace, and unity, gave permission for the Lutherans to use the upper gallery in the church…” (Doc. 4). This contract was created to reduce the amount of feud occurring between the two religions, in addition to likely addressing an immediate need by sharing resources. The English Levelers were another group that pushed for religious toleration. In regards to the lack of toleration among the English, they stated that, “nothing having caused more distractions and anguish in all ages than persecution and molestation for matters of conscience in and about religion” (Doc. 6). This group represented the radical religious reformers of England, and shows how many common people felt frustration with their ruler’s stance on religious
toleration. In Amsterdam, their town council, also known as the Committee of Regents, allowed the institution of a Catholic church within their city, but at many drawbacks. “To avoid giving any offense, Glabbais promises that the entrance to the new permitted assembly place shall no longer be on the main street but behind it in an alley, where it is less offensive…” (Doc. 9). Despite the contract being unfair, this marks a major milestone showing how local governments were willing to negotiate to reach a compromise. Despite this compromise though, this document may be inadequate as a source due to the probability that this committee of regents made this authorization on order from a higher civil authority. Their tolerance, as insignificant as it may seem, may have been in fact next to nothing as Catholics might have been persecuted anyway. This grouping also doesn’t mention a merchant group’s input on religious toleration in relation to trade. This would support my argument by giving an example of how trade can foster greater religious toleration. The arguments and practices made by monarchs, intellectuals, and councils varied on the groups experience as religious minorities, or majorities. Often depending on whether one had been persecuted or whether one was a member of the majority religion in a region affected how one approached the idea of religious toleration. Even the quotes arguing in support of less toleration are made in the context of a wider European discussion of the idea of religious toleration.
The Edict of Nantes had given Protestants, or Huguenots, in France the ability to practice their religion without fear of violence or persecution. Enacted in the late 1500s in an effort to resemble France after the destruction of the French Wars of Religion, the Edict of Nantes served as a means to unite the French population and end the violence that often accompanied religious persecution. Louis’ decision to revoke such a peace-promoting edict, in an effort to homogenize his country and align his subjects with his own beliefs, clearly illustrates his giving of priority to his own agenda, as opposed to that which would best benefit his country. However, while the claim that the Revocation of the Edict of Nantes was detrimental to French society, seems to be disproven by Doc 6, which essentially asserts that the king’s revocation has resulted in the rapid conversion of “whole towns” and describes the king as “the invincible hero destined to… destroy the terrible monster of heresy”, the author’s inherently biased point of view must be addressed. This description, which could be used as evidence to support the fact that Louis did act in interest of the state, must be taken with a grain of salt as the author himself, a member of the Assembly of the Clergy, does not even have the best interest of the state in mind; rather, he is
First, before exploring Luther’s rejection of the peasant revolt, one must examine his explanation of Christian freedom. Written in 1520, The Freedom of a Christian proclaimed the new freedom to be found in salvation by faith alone. His doctrine liberated people from works but also from the laws of the Old Testament. Salvation was found in the promise of Go...
As with any new monarch in Europe came with them profound changes on the policies and governing of that time period. This was especially true following the birth of the Protestant Reformation and religion. Rulers of the time period were pressed to follow the old ways of religion in Catholicism or embrace the revolutionary Lutheranism or Protestantism movements. A few intelligent, humane leaders decided to be neutral on this issue, and they were defined as the politiques. Elizabeth I, Henry of Navarre and William the Silent were all extraordinary rulers of their respective monarchies. Their tolerance of religion was revolutionary for the time period, and is how they all relate to the singular word, politique. Each had their own degree of tolerance for the opposing religion. Elizabeth I created her tolerant state by symbolic notions, Henry of Navarre was a boisterous ruler always looking to make his policies of tolerance known to his people, and William the Silent took the quiet approach with his inaction to religious persecution. Each of these rulers manifested a politique not only through their toleration of religion, but their varying degrees of tolerance.
In the 1560’s, France’s Catholics were being challenged by the Calvinists of Geneva for over a decade. After the St. Bartholomew’s Day massacre King Henry IV issued the Edict of Nantes that mandated Catholicism as the kingdom’s religion, but also offered Huguenots the ability to hold public offices, be able to worship at certain times and places, and enter hospitals and un...
Louis' reign brought large economic gain and severe economic recession. He was the first king to embrace mercantilism in his country as the form of economy. Unfortunately, Louis was a devout Catholic, and ruined his economy with one move. He revoked the Edict of Nantes, the document that said that Huguenots could worship Protestantism in peace. This infuriated the Huguenots, and they left with their skills. By the loss of 200,000 skilled workers and business leaders, France's income dropped.
...t proved to be the most predominant factor that caused much of the violence seen throughout Europe. While it is usually not favored by many authoritative figures, the establishment of some sort of religious toleration law would prove to resolve many of the religious conflicts within the European countries. Examples of this such as the Edict of Nantes and the Toleration Act proved to be effective since there were little to no religious uprisings under their enforcement. In addition, the government or authoritative ruler could enact a law to punish those who persecute others based on their religion. If these two suggestions were taken into account earlier on in the sixteenth century, the violence of the seventeenth century would have been greatly reduced. More importantly, however, these solutions can be used to prevent future religious violent acts from happening.
Religion commanded a central and varied role in European politics, society, culture, and thought, from the late 16th century to the Enlightenment.
The church’s robust grip on religious expression shattered as medieval society transitioned into a period known as the Reformation. Characterized by the rejection of common ideology, the Reformation sparked religious curiosity. Reformers such as John Calvin and Martin Luther offered interpretations of the Bible in direct opposition to the Catholic Church’s teachings, forcing Europeans to examine and formulate their own beliefs. This style of thinking was foreign to European society because up to this point in history Europeans were passive absorbers of Catholic Church ideology. Hence, it was natural that an era considered the Age of Enlightenment followed the period of rejection and questioning known as the Reformation.
During this time France was ruled by a series of absolutist rulers such as Richelieu an appointed regent who took Louis XIII place until he was old enough to be king, and Mazariń who was Louis XIV appointed regent until he came of age. Amidst the constant changing of laws and war during these kings reign, religious tension between the Huguenots and the Catholics was starting to build back up, even after Henry IV wrote the Edict of Nantes, which gave Hugenotten followers the right to practice their religion without any prosecution, as well as being able to fortify their cities. During the reign of Louis XIV, tension between the monarchy and the nobility was at an all-time high; Nobles of the robe and Nobles of the sword were used as a ploy
All of Europe used to be united under one religion, Catholicism. Europe started inching away from Catholicism during the 13th - 15th centuries. The church leaders started to only think about money and the power they held, instead of the real reason they were supposed to be there, God. This caused an uprising of people who no longer wanted to be a part of the Catholic church, nicknamed Protestants because they protested the ways of the catholic church. The Protestant Reformation was caused by corruption in the church, Martin Luther and John Calvin’s ideas, and the clergy and their preachings.
The church was also brought under control, and Louis sought to do away with all other religions by revoking the Edict of Nantes. Political power was given to noblemen, who were seen as possible opponents, and they were made to reside part of the year at Louis XIVs’ court in Versailles in order to display dominance over them (458–459).... ... middle of paper ... ...
The Protestant would originally practice their faith in secrecy in order to avoid punishment from the majority of society that was Catholic based faith. Calvin Protestant began to publically perform ceremonies and practice their faith in front of all to see. many of the Calvin followers were nationally French and wanted to spread the Protestant Reformation in their homeland of France. More French Reformed churches began to spread out in France, which made protestant want to practice their faith more publically. This act angered the Catholic people of France even more resulting in an attack on the Protestants. Catherine de’Medici tried to ease the tension between the protestant and the Catholic by enacting a law that forbid harm to Protestant
Having a religion change, many times, takes a toll on those who follow. This would include the hardships of the Protestant Reformation and the Catholic Reformation. Religious tensions were spreading throughout Europe, starting from the Protestant Reformation. Some of those who followed the Catholic church began to question how much was true and how many lies they were told to believe in. Many important Leaders of the Reformation stated their opinions about that Catholic church. These opinions would then be evaluated in the Catholic Reformation, The Council of Trent. Beliefs would be revised and practices would be evaluated. The core beliefs would still be Catholic, thus still different from a protestant beliefs. This led to officials of states
Following the china sacrament, France witnessed a significant shift in its religious landscape. On June 1, 1540, Francis issued the Edict of Fontainebleau, declaring Protestantism to be "high treason against God and mankind." The edict prescribed severe penalties, including death, public humiliation, loss of property, and torture, for those found guilty of practicing Protestantism. This marked a turning point as the state began to view Protestantism as a serious threat, leading to a harsh crackdown on religious dissent. The implementation of the Edict of Fontainebleau resulted in a wave of persecution against Protestants.
Before the 16th century Protestant Reformation, Christianity it Europe was in a questionable and somewhat corrupt state. During the mid 15th century central and western Europe was set up in the form of a hierarchy, which was headed by the pope. At this period in time the pope claimed all spiritual authority over Christians, as well as political authority over all inhabitants of the Papal States. In addition to the claims the pope made, the church also owned close to one-fourth of the land in Europe that lead to a strong centralization of papal authority. Close to all of the Europeans at this time were Christian and would pay taxes directly to the church as a result of this ownership. European Christians were taught in their upbringing that without the guidance and rituals of the priests and the church, there would be no path for them to salvation. Despite the church attempting to teach morality among members, the clergy started to become greedy and full of corruption that fueled their desire for ...