of tolerance and liberty.7 Similarities
have been pointed out between the first
colonial government of Maryland and
the American plan of government under
the Constitution, in particular with
religious liberty, general suffrage, an
elective branch of the legislature and an
appointive upper branch and three in-
dependent departments of government.8
The scope of this paper will not ex-
tend beyond a sketch of the important
events concerning the theme of tolera-
tion and its development in Maryland,
from a background setting of religious
persecution in the early 1600's, to the
recent cases involving church and state.
A solution to the underlying question of
interpretation, whether the Establish-
ment Clause requires complete separa-
tion of church and state, or whether it
permits nondiscriminatory government
participation, will not be attempted —
although some conclusions will be sug-
gested.
THE SETTING IN EUROPE:
GEORGE CALVERT
The early part of the 17th Century
was an age of religious persecution in
both continental Europe and Great
Britain. The Spanish Inquisition, aimed
7 Truman, Maryland and Tolerance, 40
md. hist. mag. 85, 86 (1945). Mr. Tru-
man, in an address before the Maryland
Historical Society, noted that "Truly all his-
tory is but an introduction into the future.
The greatest tragedies in history have been
made by people who did not read and analyze
history."
Of the two original havens for the reli-
giously persecuted, Rhode Island and Mary-
land, the latter seems to have stood for a truer
concept of toleration. See E. riley, mary-
land—the pioneer of religious liberty
33 (1917) ; J. ives, the ark and the dove
242 (1936); and, particularly, W. russell,
maryland: the land of sanctuary, ch.
12 (1907).
8 B. long, genesis of the constitution
96 (1926).
16
|
chiefly at the Jews, was at the height of
its activity. Germany was in the midst
of the Thirty Years' War, a bloody con-
flict born of theocratic animosities; re-
ligious affiliations, public policies and
national politics were so intertwined
with the governments of state and
church that they could not be separated.
Austria was bound up in the same
struggle. France alone was a haven for
toleration, the only country in Europe
where Protestants and Catholics alike
enjoyed their form of religion. How-
ever, France, too, was the scene of more
than one theological skirmish, especially
those involving Papal acknowledgment
of the French King's selection of Church
officers.9
Catholics in Ireland were made to
suffer under the established Church of
England; they were taxed for the sup-
port of the Church, and they were fined
for not attending Sunday morning serv-
ices of the Church. When the Irish
rebelled, they were massacred — 3,000 in
one day on the Island Magee. Scottish
Presbyterians were forced by James I,
King of England, to accept his five
articles of religion, and Scotland, too,
was aroused to rebellion. Wales was
hopelessly caught in between.10
In England itself, the established
Church was becoming more and more
dictatorial. Roman Catholics could
neither vote nor hold office. Conform-
ity of worship was enforced by fines and
imprisonment. Priests were tortured,
prisons were crowded with "Papists,"
and people were burned at stake for
denying the Trinity.11
9 See generally riley, supra note 7 at 13-
25.
10Id. at 10-13.
11 For a more detailed background, see id,
at 7-9; ives, supra note 7 at 13-20; and
russell, supra, note 7, chs. 1-2.
|
