IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/amposc/v47y2003i2p248-258.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Tradition and Prudence in Locke's Exceptions to Toleration

Author

Listed:
  • David J. Lorenzo

Abstract

Why did Locke exclude Catholics and atheists from toleration? Not, I contend, because he was trapped by his context, but because his prudential approach and practical judgments led him to traditional texts. I make this argument first by outlining the connections among prudential exceptionality, practical judgments, and traditional texts. I then describe important continuities between conventional English understandings of the relationship between state and religion and Locke's writings on toleration, discuss Locke's conception of rights, and illustrate his use of prudential exceptions and distinctions. I conclude by arguing that Locke's problems are relevant to assessing contemporary liberal discussions of toleration and the separation of state and religion that lean heavily on practical justifications.

Suggested Citation

  • David J. Lorenzo, 2003. "Tradition and Prudence in Locke's Exceptions to Toleration," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 47(2), pages 248-258, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:amposc:v:47:y:2003:i:2:p:248-258
    DOI: 10.1111/1540-5907.00017
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-5907.00017
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/1540-5907.00017?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:amposc:v:47:y:2003:i:2:p:248-258. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1540-5907 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.