Since King Charles II had no deep religious convictions it suited him to be indulgent in religious matters. By 1672 he was ready to grant indulgence to Dissenters. The word “indulgence” implied permission to do something that in itself was wrong but that would not be punished. The word “toleration” likewise implied a grudging attitude and a power to grant or to withhold. It did not acknowledge a rightful claim, but only admitted a difference that would be overlooked. The idea of religious liberty to think and feel and do according to the dictates of the individual conscience was in harmony with the Renaissance conception of the worth of the person. But the Anabaptists and Quakers alone among the reformers believed that humanity’s relation to God was so personal that no civil authority had any right to interfere. The Revolution of 1688, which drove James II from the throne, was accompanied by two constructive measures of legislation. One was the Bill of Rights, the other the Toleration Act – both passed by Parliament in 1689. The former forbade the king to make use of dispensations, to usurp the functions of the courts, to levy taxes, or to keep an army of his own. The right of the English people to make a petition was also assured. The Toleration Act put limits on the authority of the Church. All groups were granted the right to their own independent worship, although the Church of England was recognized as the national church order. In America attempts by the Baptists to secure special privileges at the time of the renunciation of the English political allegiance were unsuccessful. It was not until 1833 that legislation was secured in Massachusetts that gave to all churches the same legal recognition.
Impact: The progress of democracy contributed to the on-going proliferation of different sects in America.