When Policy of Tolerance diminished those different
Policies of toleration have repeatedly required societies to abandon or dilute previously held cultural, religious, or moral ideals—most often a claim to exclusive public authority for one faith or set of norms. This is not an accident of particular cases; it is built into what “toleration” historically meant.
What the historical record shows
In early-modern Europe the dominant ideal was confessional uniformity: one public religion, one set of moral and legal norms, backed by the state. Toleration edicts deliberately stepped away from that ideal.
- Joseph II’s 1781 Patent of Toleration is a clear instance. The Habsburg lands had treated Catholic uniformity as both a religious duty and a political necessity. The patent left Catholicism privileged in public worship, marriage registration, and certain fees, yet it explicitly permitted Protestant and Orthodox private practice, their own schools and pastors, property ownership, and access to offices. That was a partial surrender of the older ideal. Crypto-Protestants emerged in large numbers; the public monopoly was broken even if not abolished.
- The Peace of Westphalia (1648) ended a century of religious war by accepting that rulers could choose Lutheranism, Calvinism, or Catholicism and that minority confessions would be tolerated within limits. The previous ideal of a single Christian empire under one faith was set aside.
- The Edict of Nantes (1598) and later English and Dutch arrangements similarly traded the aspiration of religious homogeneity for civil peace and economic utility. In each case the older ideal was not refined; it was restricted.
The Ottoman millet system offers a non-Christian example. Non-Muslim communities were allowed internal autonomy and religious practice, but only under a hierarchical arrangement that preserved Muslim legal and political primacy and imposed special taxes and disabilities. Tolerance existed; equality and cultural dominance by the host tradition did not.
In the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, secularization and liberal constitutionalism extended the same pattern. Disestablishment of churches, removal of religious tests for office, and later expansions of individual rights required states to relinquish the idea that public culture and law should embody one religious or moral tradition. Many observers—both at the time and later—described this as a genuine surrender of previously shared cultural ideals, not merely a technical adjustment.
The conceptual point
Toleration, as classically understood, is not indifference and not full equality. It is the decision by a dominant group or state to refrain from suppressing practices it still regards as wrong or inferior. That decision always involves some retreat from the ideal of shaping the whole public order according to one’s own highest values. Where the tolerated group remains small and the host culture retains confidence and demographic weight, the retreat can be limited. Where numbers, fertility, or institutional capture grow, the original cultural framework can erode further—exactly the outcome critics of open-ended multicultural policies have warned about in recent decades.
Philosophers have long noted the tension. Locke’s Letter Concerning Toleration argued for religious liberty while still excluding atheists and Catholics on political grounds; he did not claim that every ideal could be surrendered without cost. Later liberal theory often treated the surrender itself as the higher ideal (neutrality, individual autonomy). Critics from Burke onward argued that societies which systematically refuse to defend their own cultural inheritance eventually lose the capacity to transmit any coherent ideals at all.
Different evaluations
- One view holds that the surrender was necessary and beneficial: religious wars were worse than pluralism, and open societies proved more prosperous and freer.
- Another holds that successive expansions of tolerance have moved from limited, reciprocal arrangements (Westphalia, Joseph II) to a one-way process in which the historic host culture is expected to accommodate practices it once considered incompatible, while reciprocal accommodation is not demanded. On this reading, the policy has ceased to be toleration and become self-undermining.
- A third position distinguishes between tolerating private belief and tolerating public challenges to the basic norms of the host society. The first can be compatible with cultural continuity; the second is not.
Historical policy, therefore, has often meant precisely what the question asks about: a deliberate retreat from prior cultural ideals in exchange for peace, utility, or a new ideal of individual liberty. Whether that exchange was wise depends on the specific ideals surrendered, the scale of the concession, and the long-term results—questions that remain contested rather than settled by the mere fact of the policy.
=
The Patent of Toleration (Toleranzpatent), issued on 13 October 1781 by Emperor Joseph II, was a landmark edict of limited religious freedom for non-Catholic Christians in the Habsburg hereditary lands. It formed a core part of the Josephinist reforms of enlightened absolutism.
Background
Since the Counter-Reformation, the Habsburg Monarchy had enforced Catholic religious uniformity in its core Austrian, Bohemian, and related lands. Protestants (Lutherans and Calvinists) faced severe restrictions; many practiced in secret as “crypto-Protestants.” Maria Theresa (r. 1740–1780) largely maintained this policy of religious homogeneity, viewing Protestantism as a threat to order and orthodoxy. Eastern Orthodox communities existed in some areas (especially among Serbs and others), but under constraints outside Hungary, where greater freedoms already applied.
Joseph II (co-regent from 1765, sole ruler from 1780) embraced Enlightenment principles. He argued that forcing conscience was harmful and that true Christian tolerance benefited both religion and the state by making subjects more useful, loyal, and productive. As early as the late 1760s–1770s, he discussed practical implementation with advisors. The patent reversed key aspects of his mother’s approach while still privileging Catholicism and limiting non-Catholic practice to avoid open confrontation with the Church.
It applied specifically to the Augsburg (Lutheran) and Helvetic (Reformed/Calvinist) confessions and non-Uniate (non-Catholic) Orthodox Christians in areas where they had not previously enjoyed public rights.
Significant Figures
- Emperor Joseph II (1741–1790): The driving force and issuer. He framed toleration as both a moral and utilitarian state interest.
- Maria Theresa: Her long insistence on Catholic uniformity provided the contrast; the patent marked a sharp break after her death.
- Prince Wenzel Anton von Kaunitz (state chancellor): Key enlightened advisor who supported toleration for reasons of state utility and had earlier pressed similar ideas.
- Franz Joseph Heinke: Involved in drafting policies on Church-state relations and the practical framework for toleration.
- Broader context included an enlightened elite of officials, some clergy, and intellectuals; opposition came from more traditional Catholic circles and parts of the hierarchy.
Main Provisions
The edict opened with the conviction that violence to conscience is harmful and that true Christian tolerance benefits religion and the state. It granted:
- Private religious practice everywhere (regardless of prior custom).
- Where at least 100 families lived in an area (even if scattered over some hours’ travel), the right to build a place of worship (Bethaus / house of prayer) and a school. These buildings could not have towers, bells, or public street entrances resembling a church.
- Freedom to choose and support their own pastors (subject to imperial confirmation) and schoolmasters (under provincial school oversight).
- Pastoral care, including for the sick, and funerals with their clergy.
- Civil rights improvements: ability (often under dispensation) to acquire property, municipal citizenship, practice as master craftsmen, hold academic posts, and enter public service. Religion was not to be a barrier; competence and moral character were the criteria. Oaths need not violate their beliefs, and they were not forced to attend Catholic processions.
- Regulation of mixed marriages: if the father was Catholic, all children were raised Catholic; if the father was Protestant and the mother Catholic, children followed the sex of the parent in the relevant formulation. Previous reversals forcing Catholic upbringing were abolished.
- Catholic privileges retained: public worship monopoly, certain parish fees (jura stolae), and control of registers in many cases.
Worship remained “private,” and the Unity of the Brethren stayed suppressed. The Catholic Church kept its dominant public status.
Results and Impact
The effects were immediate and substantial. Large numbers of crypto-Protestants emerged openly; one contemporary estimate noted around 73,000 declaring their Protestant allegiance within a year in relevant areas. Protestant parishes formed quickly, especially in Upper Austria, Styria, and Carinthia, drawing on existing secret traditions. Some conversions from Catholicism also increased, prompting authorities to try to limit them.
It was followed in January 1782 by a related Edict of Tolerance for Jews (focused more on economic utility, education, and restricted settlement rights). Broader Josephinist measures included greater state control over the Catholic Church, dissolution of many “unproductive” monasteries, and other centralizing reforms.
After Joseph’s death in 1790, conservative forces urged repeal, but the patent remained in force. Its restrictions (e.g., on church architecture and public status) lasted until later 19th-century changes, including the 1861 Protestantenpatent that granted fuller legal equality. It is widely seen as a major victory for Enlightenment ideas within Catholic absolute monarchy and a practical step toward greater religious pluralism in Central Europe, even while remaining limited and hierarchical.
In short, the Patent of Toleration was neither full equality nor radical secularism. It was a calculated, state-centered reform that ended the worst of Counter-Reformation suppression for the named groups, revealed the scale of hidden Protestantism, and became a defining example of Joseph II’s enlightened absolutism.
= October 20th
These are all historical events associated with October 20.
Here is a brief overview of each:
1548 – Founding of Nuestra Señora de La Paz
Spanish captain Alonso de Mendoza founded the city (in what is now Bolivia) on the orders of Pedro de la Gasca, acting for King Charles V of Spain (also Holy Roman Emperor). It commemorated the end of the civil wars between the Pizarro and Almagro factions in the Viceroyalty of Peru. The act of foundation occurred at the indigenous site of Laja; the settlement was soon moved to the more suitable Chuquiago (Choqueyapu) valley, where modern La Paz stands. The name “Our Lady of Peace” reflected the restored order.
1568 – Battle of Jodoigne (Battle of the River Gete/Guete)
During the early Dutch Revolt (Eighty Years’ War), Spanish forces under the Duke of Alba defeated the rear guard of an invading army led by William of Orange (William the Silent) near Jodoigne (Geldenaken) in the Spanish Netherlands (present-day Belgium). The action disrupted Orange’s campaign and forced him to abandon his invasion and withdraw.
1572 – Relief of Goes
In the Eighty Years’ War, about 3,000 Spanish Tercios under Cristóbal de Mondragón performed a celebrated night march, wading roughly 15 miles through chest-deep water across the mouth of the Scheldt estuary. They surprised and drove off the Anglo-Dutch force besieging the loyalist-held city of Goes (in Zeeland). This preserved Spanish control of the area and protected nearby Middelburg.
1720 – Capture of Calico Jack (John Rackham)
The Caribbean pirate known as Calico Jack, together with Anne Bonny, Mary Read, and their crew, was captured off Jamaica by Jonathan Barnet (acting for the Royal Navy/Jamaican authorities). Most of the crew was reportedly intoxicated; Bonny and Read offered the main resistance. Rackham was later tried and hanged at Port Royal.
1740 – Accession of Maria Theresa and start of the War of the Austrian Succession
Holy Roman Emperor Charles VI died, and his daughter Maria Theresa succeeded to the Habsburg hereditary lands (Austria, Hungary, Bohemia, etc.) under the Pragmatic Sanction of 1713. France, Prussia, Bavaria, and Saxony refused to recognize her rights. Prussia’s Frederick the Great soon invaded Silesia, opening the War of the Austrian Succession (1740–1748).
1781 – Patent of Toleration (Toleranzpatent)
Emperor Joseph II of the Habsburg Monarchy issued this edict (dated around 13–19/20 October in various accounts). It granted limited freedom of private worship and certain civil rights to Lutherans, Calvinists, and Eastern Orthodox Christians in the Habsburg lands, while preserving the privileged public status of the Catholic Church. It was a notable Enlightenment-era reform (followed by a 1782 measure concerning Jews).
1803 – U.S. Senate ratifies the Louisiana Purchase
The Senate approved the treaty with France for the purchase of the Louisiana Territory. This roughly doubled the size of the United States and opened vast lands for westward expansion.
1818 – Convention of 1818
The United States and the United Kingdom signed this agreement in London. It fixed much of the Canada–U.S. border along the 49th parallel from the Lake of the Woods to the Rocky Mountains, addressed fisheries, and provided for joint occupation of the Oregon Country for a period.
1827 – Battle of Navarino
A combined British, French, and Russian fleet under Edward Codrington destroyed the Ottoman-Egyptian fleet in Navarino Bay (Pylos, Greece) during the Greek War of Independence. It was the last major naval battle fought entirely with wooden sailing ships and decisively aided Greek independence.
1873 – First code of American football rules
Representatives of Yale, Princeton, Columbia, and Rutgers met (around mid-to-late October) and adopted a common set of rules for intercollegiate football. These early rules resembled association football (soccer) more than modern gridiron football (no carrying or throwing the ball; 20-a-side, etc.). Harvard did not participate and continued with a different, more rugby-like game.
1883 – Treaty of Ancón
Peru and Chile signed this peace treaty (in Lima/Ancón), ending Peru’s active participation in the War of the Pacific. Peru permanently ceded the province of Tarapacá to Chile; Chile also received temporary administration of Tacna and Arica (their final status settled much later).
These events span colonial foundation, European religious and succession conflicts, the Dutch Revolt, piracy, American expansion and diplomacy, the Greek independence struggle, the codification of a major sport, and a South American territorial settlement—all conventionally linked to October 20 in historical calendars.



