What is Tolerance?

The French Enlightenment writer and philosopher, Voltaire, famously asked, "What is tolerance? It is the consequence of humanity. We are all formed of frailty and error; let us pardon reciprocally each other's folly."

Freedom, reason, and tolerance are the traditional underlying values of Unitarianism. They are also the three pillars of a good society. The news over the past few months has shown only too graphically how the lack of these values can lead to suppression, unreason and intolerance. In both politics, and on the world stage, intolerance of the other has led to fiercely adversarial situations, violence and death. Why do we find it so difficult to pardon each other's "frailty and error"?

The old Unitarian leaflet, A Faith Worth Thinking About, presented values which Unitarians share, including "mutual respect and goodwill in personal relations" and "constructive tolerance and openness towards the sincerely held beliefs of others."

Outsiders may find it difficult to understand how the Unitarian movement holds together, placing, as it does, so much importance on the freedom of individual belief based on reason and conscience. Yet I believe that tolerance, this openness to new thoughts and ideas, and the refusal to "other" others, is a key concept in Unitarianism; indeed it is what has kept it green and growing down the centuries. Our movement has been underpinned by a process of continuous and continuing revelation. At different times and in different countries, different ideas have been considered to be most important. But our tolerance means we have a tigerish determination to fight for the right of others to enjoy the same freedom to worship in whatever way they choose, so long as it doesn't harm anyone else. Our "fellowship in diversity" (happy phrase) aims to be tolerant towards others. As Joyce Grenfell beautifully puts it, we believe in "loving in spite of human imperfection."

But Unitarian tolerance is NOT just another way of saying "anything goes". There was a fascinating article in our magazine, The Inquirer, many years ago, entitled, Tolerance: what's your limit? It covered both the spiritual and practical aspects of tolerance, a distinction which I think it is important to stress. On the spiritual side, for example, Sarah Tinker, lately minister at Kensington Unitarians, wrote of attending a Build Your Own Theology course: "I learnt that Unitarians, by and large, are spiritual folk who can stand the terror of uncertainty - who can accept that, in matters religious, 'We just don't know for sure'. By sitting together in religious education groups Unitarians are doing far more than just 'tolerating' each other. By truly listening to one another - by creating spaces where we can share one another's stories, hopes and fears - we affirm the right of individuals to express themselves fully and to be heard and accepted for who they are, unique human beings."

David Arthur's contribution was more pragmatic and for me, it summarises what Unitarian tolerance is (and isn't) about: "We Unitarians reckon to be tolerant folk. 'Freedom, reason and tolerance' we proclaim from the rooftops. But what does it mean to be tolerant? Is there a line to be drawn, and if so, where do we, or should we, draw it?

        Let me deal with a tolerance that isn't. We all know Unitarians who say: 'Of course I'm tolerant of other religions; if they choose to believe all that nonsense, that's okay by me!' That is not tolerance; that is condescension. Tolerance of other religions means, 'I recognise that your belief is different. Mine works for me, but I accept that yours is valid for you. And if you get benefit and meaning from it, then good for you.'

        Are there limits to tolerance? Oh yes. 'All are welcome here', says our hymn. Well, actually, no. I would not  welcome those whose beliefs advocate paedophilia, female circumcision, slavery, stoning adultererr to death or homophobia, etc. The Pagan motto of 'do as you will, provided you do no harm' is relevant here. So I draw a line. Let's not kid ourselves that there are no limits to tolerance. Where do you draw your line?"

I agree. So while I would agree with Voltaire that we need to recognise each other's frailty and error, we have to draw a line when that frailty and error leads people to harm others. We must be intolerant of others' intolerance.