>Perhaps someone else can provide the historical data in more detail than
>I can, but I have the general impression that religious toleration is
>fundamentally a _NON-western_ value, practiced first I think by Islam,
>and only adopted, and quite grudgingly, by the west after it had almost
>destroyed itself in the religous wars of the 16th and 17th centuries?
>
This is correct. Thus Milton and Locke's pleas for religious tolerance in the late 17th century were pleas for tolerance of difference kinds of Protestantism; Papists wereexpressly excepted. Wider religious tolerance got some acceptance in the 18th century. I don't know about France, but Jews operated under civil disabilities in Germany up through Bismark--I set asie a bad 12 years in the 20th century. Moreover, recall that it was considered a big victory for tolerance than Catholic could be elected President of the US in 1960.
Islam treated Jews and Christians as "People of the Book" from the 7th century on--they were not given equal rights to Muslims, but they were allowed to practice their religion, own property, and be involved in the professions; and they, especially Jews, enjoyed a physical security that Muslims and Jews did not in Christiandom until the late 19th century.
>When was it, by the way, that non-Anglicans were first allowed to enter
>Oxbridge?
>
Matriculate is one thing. Teach is another. Newton had to keep his Unitarianism a secret, and his successor in the Lucasian Professorship, also a Unitarian, lost his job over religion in the early 18th century.
>According to Christopher Hill, the last execution of a Unitarian in
>England was as late as 1699.
>
APropos of nothing, HLA Hart says that there was a Witchcraft Act prosecution in England (for fortune telling) in 1947. That's 54 years ago.
jks
_________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp