Questioning the Claims of Locke - Essay Example

This letter indicates that the only appropriate measure to end this unexpected change is by responding to the problem of religion and administration by proposing religious toleration as the only solution to this problem. This letter of toleration to some extent though it was written while emphasizing an anonymous audience portrays the power of religion as a unifying factor and above all as the “opium of the masses” (Locke, 57). On the second claim, toleration is an argument based on both a new and a general understanding of the links and relationship between religion and government. All these social systems were to work hand in hand for one could be more influential and superior to the other. The wide range of religious beliefs and practices was the influential aspect, of the political system, though Thomas Hobbes criticized the persuasion claims for he believed the imperialist-capitalism nature of the Catholic Church was one of the push and pull forces that made all the proposals made regarding religious tolerance (Locke 36). This research work, through Locke, does not believe in Christian denominations for he believes this will divert the religious affiliations thus reducing the organic solidarity towards fighting the system of governance of the day. The persuasion of the mind is, therefore, viewed as the only influential aspect to be adopted between the state and religion for the peaceful coexistence of the state versus religion and the state versus its citizens (Locke, 98).

The government should place the sovereignty in the hands of the people for the rulers owe their credit to the subjects. When it comes to persuasion, the government should, therefore, be more considerate and target the masses directly for peaceful coexistence in the social system. Social justice should be aptly upheld in any system of government to prevent day-to-day political unrest. Through this persuasion letter, the only way through which the church can gain a genuine convert is through a persuasion strategy, as opposed to violence and unrest (Locke, 143). This was one of the issues he advocated for, and as a believer of the political system, the letter assumed that the central government administration system was like the church where salvation was the order of the day. The central government, as opposed to the church, does not preach salvation therefore are very different entities in the social system. This persuasion letter, on the other hand, advocates for a complete restructuring of the political system and governance such that it can take part in the purification of souls (Locke, 78). This aspect is greatly defied by various political science scholars who believed the only thing that can create change in society is force. This is also portrayed by evil critics as Locke, as a believer, sees heaven's system of governance on earth and explains that individuals cannot deny control over their souls to secure various forces as the creator who is god does not sign up magistrates.

In conclusion, salvation as an aspect of religion and theology greatly entails the inward persuasion of the mind and force as a parallel side salvation cannot create the appropriate change required in salvation. This is because force only intimidates obedience but cannot change an individual’s beliefs acquired through religion as an aspect of socialization. The existing political and administrative system according to Locke should, therefore, embrace the inward persuasion of the mind of their subjects for peaceful governance to exist in the society. On the atheists’ subject, he also gives them a place in society, and in addition, he persuasion letter critics, and the judgemental nature of the forceful government he talks about towards the atheist community. The persuasion portrays that the atheist community should be accommodated as it is also an entity of believers just like the Roman Catholic Church though he failed to acknowledge the Protestants mushrooming in the political system. The toleration of these social entities as suggested by the political system will enhance a more civilized liberation thus the forceful society will be seen to have regained some peaceful coexistence between the people and the state. In the second claim, he questions the necessary ill-disposed nature of atheism towards obedience to the political system. This aspect of questions raised about the hostility nature portrays his liberal thinking towards tolerance in the political arena. Only the churches should teach the virtue of tolerance according to the contemporary social setting. The churches are as well are to be allowed in the politics of the society although this will greatly affect the peaceful existence of civil society for its major concern revolves around conflict resolutions in society.