Difference and Dissent: Theories of Tolerance in Medieval and Early Modern Europe.

Massie, Pascal ; GUNN, ALBERT E.

NEDERMAN, Cary J. and LAURSEN, John Christian. Difference and Dissent: Theories of Tolerance in Medieval and Early Modern Europe. Lanham, Maryland: Rowman & Littlefield, 1997. ix + 240 pp. Cloth, $62.50; paper, $23.95--Western liberal democracies praise themselves for protecting a full range of differences among individuals and groups. The origin of this ongoing process is thought to be Locke's Epistola de Tolerantia. Before the Reformation, it is assumed, "a multiplicity of beliefs was deemed to be dangerous, as well as evil; diversity was, so to speak, the devil's work, and where it existed it was to be stamped out" (p. 1). Yet, although flattering to liberalism, the conceit of a modern liberal discovery of liberty of conscience is both conceptually simplistic and historically misleading. The main virtue of this volume is to challenge this tale of Western political history. The essays presented seek (1) to demonstrate that premodern thinkers generated alternative theories of toleration; and (2) to contribute to a philosophical analysis of tolerance.

A number of contributors successfully challenge the claim according to which the only valid point of departure for a strong theoretical defense of legitimate differences must be some conception of subjective human rights. Contrasting John of Salisbury and Marsiglio of Padua, Nederman argues that "Medieval understanding of rights tended to be subsumed under issues of group identity and functional status ... Consequently, individual liberty was often filtered through intermediary identities organized according to particular tasks and duties performed within the context of the communal community" (p. 19). Thus, toleration is not a "privilege" granted at the whim of some superior authority but a "necessity" built into the very terms of social interaction. Kate Forhan, in a convincing analysis of Christine de Pizan, establishes that a "theory of toleration can be based on primarily functional grounds" (p. 79). Gary Remer shows that Bodin's theory of toleration is grounded on a positive conception of divine truth rather than on the underlying skepticism of modern liberal arguments. Stephen Lahey's essay on John Wyclift shows how the demands of a theology of Grace and a metaphysical realism can entail the promotion of systematic tolerance.

Yet beyond the question of historical accuracy, this book offers important reformulations of tolerance. Several studies suggest that Turchetti's opposition between "toleration" (which implies the ineliminability of religious diversity) and "concordance" (which implies temporary forbearance but never approval of, or resignation to difference) needs to be revised.

One might wonder, however, whether functionalism can really account for differences, or whether it reduces the other to its particular function within the whole of the social body. Tolerance is limited to those forms of actions and beliefs that do not impinge on the intercommunication of functions among the parts of the community. As Forhan puts it, the discourse of tolerance demonstrates a "willingness to accept otherness in spite of itself rather than because of difference" (p. 71). Glenn Burgess's essay illustrates this point by showing that the narrow toleration allowed by Hobbes concerns the "duty" of the sovereign rather than the "right" of individuals. There lies a fundamental aporia. One cannot call for unlimited toleration without contradiction. Should we tolerate the intolerants? If one is to answer no, then one is not fully tolerant, if one answers yes, then one's tolerance contributes to intolerance. Thus, tolerance either requires or promotes intolerance. Eventually, it is not clear whether a functionalist account has a better answer to this riddle than a liberal one. Nevertheless, by demonstrating the broad array of theories of tolerance, this book opens promising paths of inquiry for political philosophy.

Pascal Massie, Vanderbilt University.