Enlightened Chains, pg. 10

Compare the writings of the Scottish with those of the Englishman John Locke. Even the title of Locke’s writings, such as “A Letter Concerning Toleration”, indicate a greater degree of latitude in dealing with religious conviction. In The Limits of Human Understanding, Locke devotes the last section to dealing with “Reason, Faith, and Enthusiasm”. He makes specific distinction between “reason” as one way of understanding the world and “faith” as another way. They are not exactly compatible, but they can work together, in Locke’s estimation. However, he also makes distinction between original revelation - that is the direct revelation of God to a person - and traditional revelation - the means by which that revelation is transferred through history to future generations.

He makes it clear that the real pursuit is that of truth. Whenever reason and faith conflict, Locke believes that reason should be the winner. He writes, “he that takes away Reason to make way for Revelation, puts out the Light of both, and does much what the same, as if he would persuade a Man to put out his eyes, the better to receive the remote Light of an invisible Star by a Telescope." Locke sees a limit to the explanatory power of reason, though. At that point, faith (or revelation) may indeed be a guiding principle. When that revelation is seen as false, the fault is laid at the feet of the tradition of passing down revelation rather than the original revelation.

Perhaps some of this dualism, as Locke himself spoke of it, comes from his personal history. Locke’s parents were Puritans, and must have at least had some influence on his belief in religion as a tool of man’s improvement. However, while at Oxford he was presented with the opportunity to become an Anglican cleric and chose to study medicine instead. This might be the best instance of seeing Locke’s private views

Next Page