Editing Jean-Jacques Rousseau (section)

==Religion==
Having converted to [[Roman Catholicism]] early in life and returned to the austere [[Calvinism]] of his native Geneva as part of his period of moral reform, Rousseau maintained a profession of that religious philosophy and of [[John Calvin]] as a modern lawgiver throughout the remainder of his life.<ref>[https://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/510932/Jean-Jacques-Rousseau/23965/Major-works-of-political-philosophy Jean-Jacques Rousseau] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090531212145/https://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/510932/Jean-Jacques-Rousseau/23965/Major-works-of-political-philosophy |date=31 May 2009 }}. Encyclopædia Britannica</ref> Unlike many of the more agnostic Enlightenment philosophers, Rousseau affirmed the necessity of religion. His views on religion presented in his works of philosophy, however, may strike some as discordant with the doctrines of both Catholicism and Calvinism.

Rousseau's strong endorsement of religious toleration, as expounded in ''[[Emile, or On Education|Émile]]'', was interpreted as advocating [[indifferentism]], a heresy, and led to the condemnation of the book in both Calvinist [[Geneva]] and Catholic Paris. Although he praised the Bible, he was disgusted by the Christianity of his day.<ref>"There remains therefore the religion of man or Christianity—not the Christianity of to-day, but that of the Gospel, which is entirely different. By means of this holy, sublime, and real religion all men, being children of one God, recognise one another as brothers, and the society that unites them is not dissolved even at death. Book IV, Chapter 8: Civil Religion</ref> Rousseau's assertion in ''[[The Social Contract]]'' that true followers of Christ would not make good citizens may have been another reason for his condemnation in Geneva. He also repudiated the doctrine of [[original sin]], which plays a large part in Calvinism. In his "Letter to Beaumont", Rousseau wrote, "there is no original perversity in the human heart."<ref>{{cite book |title=Rousseau on Philosophy, Morality, and Religion |last=Rousseau |first=Jean-Jacques |publisher=Dartmouth College Press |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=cwINIt5H8i4C&pg=PA170 |page=170 |year=2007 |isbn=978-1-58465-664-7 |access-date=3 October 2020 |archive-date=16 March 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210316072446/https://books.google.com/books?id=cwINIt5H8i4C&pg=PA170 |url-status=live}}</ref>

In the 18th century, many [[Deism|deists]] viewed God merely as an abstract and impersonal creator of the universe, likened to a giant machine. Rousseau's deism differed from the usual kind in its emotionality. He saw the presence of God in the creation as good, and separate from the harmful influence of society. Rousseau's attribution of a spiritual value to the beauty of nature anticipates the attitudes of 19th-century [[Romanticism]] towards nature and religion. (Historians—notably [[William Everdell]], Graeme Garrard, and [[Darrin McMahon]]—have additionally situated Rousseau within the [[Counter-Enlightenment]].)<ref>{{cite book |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=ix1N2AKYVhMC |title=Enemies of the Enlightenment: The French Counter-Enlightenment and the Making of Modernity |last=McMahon |first=Darrin M. |date=2002 |publisher=Oxford University Press |isbn=978-0-19-534793-7 |access-date=13 May 2020 |archive-date=16 March 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210316072522/https://books.google.com/books?id=ix1N2AKYVhMC |url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=n4BHtQEACAAJ&q=William+everdell+christian+apologetics |title=Christian Apologetics in France: 1730–1790: the Roots of Romantic Religion |last=Everdell |first=William R. |year=1987 |publisher=Mellen |isbn=978-0-88946-976-1 |access-date=3 October 2020 |archive-date=16 March 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210316072449/https://books.google.com/books?id=n4BHtQEACAAJ&q=William+everdell+christian+apologetics |url-status=live}}</ref> Rousseau was upset that his deism was so forcefully condemned, while those of the more atheistic philosophers were ignored. He defended himself against critics of his religious views in his "Letter to [[Christophe de Beaumont|Mgr de Beaumont]], the Archbishop of Paris", "in which he insists that freedom of discussion in religious matters is essentially more religious than the attempt to impose belief by force."<ref>The full text of the letter is available online only in the French original: {{cite web |url=http://alain-leger.mageos.com/docs/Rousseau.pdf |title=Lettre à Mgr De Beaumont Archevêque de Paris (1762) |access-date=23 May 2007 |url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070704072055/http://alain-leger.mageos.com/docs/Rousseau.pdf |archive-date=4 July 2007}}</ref>