What is latitudinarianism?

Answer

Latitudinarianism, concerning religion, denotes a “broad church” approach that de-emphasizes strict adherence to doctrine, church structure, or liturgy, and instead prioritizes reason, morality, and unity. It can be viewed as a tolerance for those holding diverse religious views or doctrines. The term latitudinarianism originated in the critique of certain 17th-century theologians who believed that Puritan theology—essentially Calvinist—had unjustly dismissed the role of human understanding in grasping Christian faith.

This initial form of latitudinarianism, in opposition to Puritanism, stressed common morality, essential doctrines, and a greater reliance on evidence in discussing faith. Latitudinarians generally supported the concept of sola scriptura and the exclusive truth of the gospel, while also asserting that both revelation and reason were necessary for a full comprehension of biblical truth. This emphasis on “critical” doctrines and a willingness to accept disagreement on other doctrines led to a minimization of issues such as worship style and church governance, among others.

Like many theological terms, latitudinarianism has been interpreted differently by various individuals. It can also be practiced to varying extents by different groups and theologians. Most contemporary Christian denominations exhibit some level of tolerance towards other non-heretical groups. For instance, typical Lutheran and Baptist churches demonstrate latitudinarianism by not questioning each other’s salvation, despite disagreements on matters like infant baptism. Conversely, Baptist and Lutheran churches generally regard groups such as Jehovah’s Witnesses, who deny the Trinity and the divinity of Christ, as fundamentally non-Christian.

In other contexts, latitudinarianism carries a negative connotation. For instance, when a modern theologian charges a feeIn a certain approach to ecumenism, some may argue that it has gone too far, criticizing such a strategy as “latitudinarian.” When used in this manner, the term is intended to suggest a compromise with truth in the name of harmony. There are those who might view the aforementioned example of infant baptism as an issue where no meaningful peace can be found; associating with paedobaptists would be deemed “latitudinarian” and thus unacceptable.

Apart from their occasional usage in theological debates, the terms latitudinarian and latitudinarianism serve little purpose in modern contexts. The original latitudinarian movement had a significant impact on the Anglican and Episcopal communities, but it eventually transitioned into Unitarianism.

The term latitudinarianism is also relevant in philosophy and semantics. For instance, when John says, “Give me the biggest box,” his statement can be interpreted in two ways. He may be implying, “I want whichever box is the largest,” which is known as a de dicto statement. Alternatively, if John means, “I have a specific box in mind, and I am describing it as the biggest box,” this is referred to as a de re statement. Philosophers and logicians generally consider these as two distinct types of statements. In semantics, latitudinarianism proposes that de re is not a separate type of statement but rather a special case of de dicto.