An Open Door of Liberty: The Growth of Religious Freedom and Tolerance In Early America

By Nick McNaughton

An Open Door of Liberty is about how religious freedom came to be an important part of the basic law of the United States. There has been much discussion and some controversy over the years as to what a religiously free society requires of its citizens and its government, but there is widespread agreement that Americans should have an absolute right to maintain their own religious (or unreligious) opinions, exceptionally broad rights to their religious practices (or the right not to practice) and that government should not establish any set of beliefs as an "official" religion.

It was not always so. At the dawn of the colonial era in the early 1600s the newly-formed colonies followed the then-common practice of Europe and particularly England by demanding adherence to the beliefs and practices of a state-sponsored church. Massachusetts, established by Puritan dissenters from the official Anglican church, enforced its own interpretation of Christian theology, exiling anyone from their society who would not conform. Virginia, a bastion of orthodox Anglicanism, admitted no one who would not acknowledge the king as the head of the only true church.

An Open Door of Liberty describes how generations of religious dissidents changed the culture and eventually the law. The story includes the founding of religiously free Rhode Island by Roger Williams, Anne Hutchinson and other Massachusetts exiles, the efforts of English Catholics led by the Calverts to create a tolerant haven in Maryland, the role of the Quakers throughout the colonies in challenging oppressive laws at considerable physical peril as well as the establishment of Pennsylvania by Quaker William Penn as one of the most tolerant societies of its day and the role of the early Baptists from John Clarke to later figures such as Isaac Backus and their advocacy of "soul liberty." Through their efforts and those of others, most Americans came to agree with Thomas Jefferson that "Almighty God hath created the mind free" and supported the religion clauses of the First Amendment as well as similar laws in the first constitutions of the newly independent states.

Also discussed in this book are some of the ramifications of attempting to create a religiously free society. For example, what is meant by "separation of church and state" and why does use of this phrase sometimes result in arguments? How did breaking apart the church-state power structure help make democracy possible? If religious freedom is part of our basic law why have some religious groups been subject to hostility and violations of their rights? These topics and other aspects of religious freedom have been the subject of their own detailed works, but the overview contained in An Open Door of Liberty helps give some context to the subject.

• Language: English
• Publisher: eBookIt.com
• Release date: Apr 26, 2016
• ISBN: 9781456610265

Book preview

about.

CHAPTER 1

A LEGACY OF PERSECUTION

The system of officially-enforced religion that came to the American colonies had its roots in a unified church-state apparatus which had existed in Western Europe for over a thousand years and which suppressed any dissenting viewpoint as one of its primary functions. The origins of the system go back to the beginnings of Christianity in the ancient Roman Empire.

At the beginning of the Christian era, the Roman civilization worshipped a number of gods and the general belief was that if individual citizens showed the gods disrespect it could bring trouble for all. Religious rituals were under the ultimate control of the emperor who was seen as the upholder of religious tradition. The Empire had expanded over a large part of Europe, Northern Africa and the Middle East. As it did so, it absorbed many cultures which worshipped different gods. Rome was happy to let the conquered peoples continue to honor their own deities though it demanded that the Roman gods also be acknowledged.

This created friction with the growing number of Christians in the empire who refused to worship any but whom they viewed as the one true God. The conflict led to the persecution of Christians, the extent of which varied depending on the intentions of successive emperors. Some emperors tolerated Christians, others inflicted torture and death.

THE TWO SWORDS OF CHRISTIANITY

The persecution of the Christians ended when one of the emperors, Constantine, became a believer himself. In 313 he issued an edict providing for full rights to all adherents to follow the religion of their choice. Any equilibrium was short-lived because Christianity now had the upper hand. Within seven years, the empire was sponsoring the construction of Christian churches while services in the ancient religion became prohibited. By 346, with another emperor on the throne, offering sacrifices to the old Roman gods had become a capital offense.

A new crime was spawned – heresy - an opinion or belief that is different from an official standard. The derivation, from a Greek word which means a choice, is ironic – when heresy became a crime it was the end of any freedom to choose in religious matters. Many interpretations of Christian doctrine as well as other religious ideas existed then. Through several councils true Christianity was defined which made it possible to identify and attack any deviations.

The tradition created in the late Roman Empire and justified by various philosophers and scholars resulted in a pattern that would prove very hard to break. For roughly the next millennium, the Roman Catholic Church had a monopoly on religion in Western Europe and also considerable political control because the heads of the many states which replaced unified Roman rule depended on the blessing of the Church to make their authority legitimate.

The combination of church and state was described at the time as two swords which God has given to Christendom for protection. Priests, who left many of the written records of that era, usually depicted the Church as the senior partner in the relationship. But in practice it was not always so, with secular rulers and popes continually jockeying against each other for advantage. Kings forced to stand barefoot in the snow to beg papal forgiveness or to be scourged before the tomb of a saint, the kidnapping of a pope by royal troops all make for very interesting reading but through all the political intrigue, no one questioned the basic assumptions of the system. Over time, however, the continual battles of the Church for worldly power convinced many that it had lost sight of its spiritual mission.

TREATMENT OF THE JEWS

The only significant religious minority that held its ground throughout the entire millennium of Catholic Europe was Judaism. In the best of times their existence was precarious, at the worst horrific. They were sometimes protected because of their ability to provide services such as finance and medicine, which European Christians would not provide for themselves due to a combination of scruples and ignorance. Jews usually lived in isolated ghettos and were subject to many discriminatory laws which in particular times and places included special taxes and being forced to wear identifying insignia. Their religious beliefs and sacred writings were subject to public ridicule. Jews were often subject to arrest, torture and execution, sometimes simply for being Jews, at other times being blamed for crimes, often the death of children, without the slightest evidence. They could be set upon by mobs sometimes at the instigation of government officials or priests. At such times, their property would commonly be subject to destruction or looting. Often they were given the choice between conversion to Christianity or death, frequently accepting the latter. In the later middle ages they would face expulsion at short notice from a number of countries including England, France, Spain and many German-speaking areas.

OPPOSITION TO CATHOLIC UNITY

During the last few hundred years of the Middle Ages, opposition began to appear to Catholic dominance. The Waldensians, founded in the late 1100s, believed that lay people should be allowed to read and preach the gospel. The Cathars, also called the Albigensians, who arose shortly thereafter in southern France, believed in various unorthodox doctrines. The Catholics made strenuous efforts to suppress both groups, including the killing of many members.

A scholarly 14th century English priest named John Wycliffe took the position that God is the supreme authority of the Christian religion and therefore the primary duty of each Church member is to understand and obey the will of God. To make it easier for the English people to do so he advocated sermons that were based directly on the Scriptures and committed what was then the severe heresy of translating the Bible into the English of his time. Wycliffe considered that the Pope was simply a steward of God who could be judged by the extent he adhered to or strayed from Biblical principles. He ably defended the English government in various financial disputes with Rome and condemned many abusive but financially lucrative practices of the Church, which made him a hero in England. Wycliffe also trained many clerics, known as the Lollards, who went around the country living frugally and preaching the gospel. The Catholic Church branded Wycliffe a heretic but his service to the English crown ensured his physical safety. His English allies could not save him from becoming a virtual exile in his own land which is how he died in 1384. Many copies of his writings were burned and the Lollards were subject to official persecution for several hundred years until they faded from the scene.

Wycliffe's best-known adherent, John Huss of Bohemia, suffered a worse fate than his mentor. Like Wycliffe, Huss used his position as a priest to advocate the position that the Pope should only be obeyed to the degree that he followed the Scriptures and he heavily criticized the materialism and concern for worldly power of the Catholic Church. He also refused to disavow Wycliffe. Huss’s growing popularity became a cause of official alarm. After spending several years under attack, he was eventually called before a council of church authorities. Huss’s enemies, hoping to publicly win back a high-profile dissident, offered to spare his life if he publicly confessed his errors and promised never to teach them again. Huss’s refusal led to his public burning in 1415. So great was the fear of Wycliffe 30 years after his death that the same council ordered his bones to be dug up and scattered as well as requiring once again that his writings be burned.

THE RISE OF THE INQUISITION

A principal tool of the Catholic Church for suppressing dissent was the Inquisition which came into being after the failure of the Church’s military crusade to stop the spread of Catharism. Despite the slaughter of thousands, the sect continued to flourish. So, in the middle of the thirteenth century, the Church developed the Inquisition as a new means of suppressing heretics. Its purpose, according to an instruction manual of the time for priests was: …the destruction of heresy. Heresy cannot be destroyed unless heretics are destroyed: heretics cannot be destroyed unless their defenders and perpetrators are destroyed and this is effected in two ways, either when they are converted to the true Catholic faith, or when, on being abandoned to the secular arm they are corporally burned. The Inquisition targeted thoughts as well as actions. It was a source of terror for hundreds of years in large part because anyone who ever had an unorthodox idea, even if never communicated to anyone, could be found guilty.

The inquisitional tactics derived to fight the Cathars remained more or less the same over the centuries that it operated. A local inquisition started with the arrival in a village by an ecclesiastical authority. He would deliver a sermon denouncing heresy and offer a period of grace during which heretics could confess and receive relatively mild punishment. To show his commitment to the true faith, the repenting miscreant would be expected to name everyone else suspected of heresy. The result was suspicion and fear throughout the area. No one could be sure whether someone else had turned him in. Since the crime was often a matter of thought rather than tangible acts and there was no presumption of innocence, anyone could be found guilty. Many came forward in fear and denounced themselves as well as their friends and neighbors.

At the end of the grace period, those accused who had not appeared on their own were summoned to the ecclesiastical court. The charges against the person were only vaguely explained and the person was not confronted with his accusers. Declaring oneself innocent or not confessing in a way that matched the accusations was considered to be strong evidence of guilt as was confessing without naming fellow heretics.

The suspect at this point would normally be imprisoned, usually in solitary confinement, for an indefinite amount of time with sporadic periods of intense interrogation. Starvation and the pleas of family members were used as a means to break the individual's will. Torture was also regularly used in a variety of forms. The justification for the inquisition was the same as was used for all savage acts against those who would not conform: heretics faced an eternity of suffering. The torments imposed by the inquisitors were therefore nowhere near as bad as what awaited the person in the afterlife, if they did not confess and repent.

If the heretic confessed, which the large majority did, he would receive an ecclesiastical punishment which could consist of being whipped in public, being required to wear penitential garments or some other form of amends. The most horrible fate was reserved for those who maintained their innocence. The unrepentant, after maintaining their resistance through many months of agony, were handed over to the state for execution, normally by burning at the stake. The Church, in handing the individual over usually made a show of asking the state to show mercy and spare the heretic’s life. In fact, it was known that any leniency on the part of a secular official might make him the next one to cower before the priests.

The Inquisition was a short-term unqualified success. The Cathars were eradicated as a movement in France and throughout the Catholic domain in Western Europe. By the end of the 1300s, the Inquisition had become a permanent fixture in different parts of Europe. It would last until the early nineteenth century, though by around 1700 it had passed its peak.

THE SPANISH INQUISITION

The Spanish Inquisition, which began in 1478 under the leadership of Tomas de Torquemada became by far the most notorious branch. Its negative reputation was thoroughly deserved, although its infamy is due in part to propaganda by Spain’s enemies, most notably England.

The rulers of Spain considered themselves to have a serious situation. For the previous hundreds of years, Spain had been controlled by Muslim invaders. In addition to tolerating the Christians in their midst, the Muslims extended their protection to Jews. Since Spain then became one of the few places in Europe where Jews could live freely, it acquired a large Jewish population. For the duration of the Muslim occupation, the three religions lived side by side more or less peaceably. Many Jews held high positions in Muslim-controlled Spain.

As the Christians took over more and more of the country (the re-conquest was completed in 1492) the status of Jews and Muslims dropped. Eventually members of both groups who refused to convert to Catholicism would be ordered out, but the ones who converted and stayed were under constant suspicion of being Christian in name only. So, in addition to attacking everyday heresy, the Spanish Inquisition was especially harsh on Jewish & Muslim converts, many of whom were expelled or executed.

Branches of the Spanish Inquisition existed in Spain’s New World colonies since the native peoples who had converted to Catholicism were also suspected of being backsliders. There is no exact count of the number of victims but thousands died and the number who suffered lesser penalties was far greater. And the climate of fear the Inquisition created affected the entire society.

By taking the lead in New World exploration, Spain emerged in the 1500s as one of the first true world powers. It fell rapidly from this high point and within a few centuries it had become a minor international player. Countries can decline for many reasons and historians debate how much of an effect the Inquisition had on Spain’s decay. But one thing is certain: the ruination of two vibrant minority communities and the climate of terror instilled by the Inquisition were certainly destructive.

THE HAMMER OF WITCHES

At the same time that the inquisition sought out heretics, religious persecution in the form of witch-hunting also destroyed many thousands of lives. In the 1480s, two German priests published the book Malleus Mallifacarum which means The Hammer of Witches, essentially an instruction manual on the detection and destruction of witchcraft. A papal decree issued at around the same time as the book also established that witchcraft was a form of heresy and punishable by burning. Alleged witches had experienced varying amounts of difficulty throughout the Middle Ages, but the book combined with the Pope’s endorsement of persecution created witch hunts of a magnitude vastly exceeding anything in the past. No one knows exactly how many people were put to death for witchery over the next two centuries but best estimates are in the mid to upper tens of thousands, probably most of them in German-speaking areas and most of the rest in other hotbeds of witch persecution such as Scotland, France and parts of Scandinavia. Much of the business of the Inquisition in countries where it was active was investigating charges of witchcraft.

People who were unpopular for one reason or another in the local community were common targets. Malleus Mallifacarum stated that witches were most likely to be women because witchcraft comes from carnal lust, which is in women insatiable. Frequently, all of the misfortunes of the local area from unexpected deaths to destruction or loss of possessions were blamed on the relationship of the accused with the devil. At a time period in history when there was no explanation for many illnesses and natural events, witchcraft seemed like a plausible reason for things that went wrong. In accordance with Malleus, women were most frequently accused, particularly if middle-aged or elderly with no male relatives to protect them. Malleus held that the belief that there are such beings as witches is so essential a part of the Catholic faith that to obstinately maintain the opposite opinion manifestly savors of heresy. As with heresy inquisitions, anyone judging witchcraft who showed leniency or skepticism about the proceeding could find himself the next to be accused.

The witch hunters used legal procedures that were similar to the inquisitions in many respects. Persons suspected of witchcraft were subject to arrest and detainment with no right to challenge the procedure. They were held and usually tortured until they confessed and also until they named other suspects. Then they were burned. To add insult to injury, torture and execution were often regarded as services which the victim or his family were required to pay for, giving a financial incentive to the perpetrators.

THE REFORMATION

The increased pressure to find heretics and witches combined with the early unsuccessful reform movements were signs that religious unity was slipping. Historians cite many reasons for the Church’s loss of control. The pursuit of wealth and power by the Church alienated both followers and priests. Another possible reason is that new information available to Europeans from many sources including the exploration of the East and the Americas made them willing to challenge the Church’s doctrinal authority. It could also be, as some radical reformers of the time stated, that forcing people to believe something without helping them to understand it, without persuading them of its truth is only going to work for a limited time before recoiling.

Whatever the cause, the explosion happened in the early 1500s ultimately splitting Christianity into many sects. What was called The Reformation began in 1517 when an upstart priest named Martin Luther protested the practice of selling indulgences whereby one’s sins could be forgiven in exchange for payment of money to the Church.

According to some, Luther began his movement in the German city of Wittenberg by posting 95 theses (by theses is meant propositions for discussion) concerning official church doctrines which he thought should be changed. The states that make up modern Germany as well as other surrounding areas were then part of what was called the Holy Roman Empire. The Empire had been around for hundreds of years as the supposed re-creation of the Roman Empire with the sanction of the Pope. In reality, each of its member states was largely independent. There was an Emperor who was elected by the individual states with limited authority.

Luther was not seeking to split the Church – just to reform it. However, rather than take up the issues he raised on their merits, Church officials demanded that he yield to papal authority. Luther not only refused to withdraw his beliefs, using the newly-created power of the printing press he became an even more visible opponent. Whether or not the 95 theses ever really appeared on the door in Wittenberg, they were soon all over Europe along with many of his other writings. The official response was more brute force. A papal directive in 1520 condemned Luther’s writings as heresy. Luther publicly burned it along with attacks on his writings and volumes of official church law that he felt were contrary to true Christianity.

In 1521, Charles V, recently elected as emperor, called Luther to appear before him and representatives of the states (called the Diet) at Worms. Luther was first shown a pile of his writings and asked to acknowledge them as his, which he did. He was then asked to answer yes or no to the question, Will you recant? Twenty-four hours later he gave a much longer answer than a simple no in which he said that denying the truth in his books would add strength to … tyranny and concluded that he would not give up his views without a conviction based on Scripture and plain reason. There is no record that he really said, Here I stand; I can do no other, as claimed by a later editor of his writings but the sentence very concisely sums up his position.

In the previous century, John Huss had gone to his death for taking a similarly courageous position, but times had changed. Luther’s works had become sufficiently popular that he was protected by the head of one of the German states from where he continued to spread his ideas and translated the Bible into German.

Within a few years, the Lutheran Church had emerged as a formidable opponent to Catholicism. Despite their theological differences and calls for reform of various practices, neither the Lutherans nor the other major denominations that came to be called Protestantism seriously questioned the assumption that there could only be one correct form of religion and that its beliefs and practice would be enforced by the state. The new Protestant movements did not have the established inquisitional machinery that Catholicism had developed over centuries but they still managed to attack heretics and also used more or less the same standards in condemning witches. Of course, Catholics were sometimes seen as heretics or witches in Protestant territory and vice versa. Anti-Semitism was for the most part just as prevalent in Protestant areas as in Catholic.

The key proponent of Protestant reform besides Luther was the French scholar John Calvin. When his reformist tendencies became known in the 1530s, he was forced to flee strongly Catholic France. Eventually, he established himself in Geneva, Switzerland as the supreme religious authority. Calvin’s ideas contributed both to the growth of democracy and freedom of religion. He stressed the importance of the individual conscience and in his writings criticized those methods by which many until now have tried to force them [dissenters] to our faith. He made an effort to distinguish between the duty of civil government and the church. And, while he held that Christians must obey princes who are set over us, he also considered that leaders who didn’t adhere to the word of God should be "put down, and held of no more account than worn-out shoes," arguments later adapted by the colonists as they struggled with the British crown.

Calvinism played an important part in the growth of the United States. The Puritan movement was based on Calvinist principles and virtually all of the religious dissidents who came to New England were Calvinists. Although the Massachusetts General Court claimed to be following Calvin’s interpretation of Christianity in sending Roger Williams into exile, Williams himself often cited Calvin in support of his views of religious freedom. In addition to being the foundation of Puritan thought, the Reformed Church advocated by Calvin established itself as the official Church in Scotland and the Netherlands and also had considerable strength elsewhere in Europe where Calvinist movements arose as minority movements and became a source of conflict with established churches. Members of many of these Calvinist churches, particularly the Scottish and Dutch, developed an important presence in colonial America.

Whatever inspiration Calvin may have provided to later generations, he listened to no dissenting voices in Geneva. Several who disagreed with him on relatively minor points of doctrine were forced to leave. In 1553, religious scholar Michael Servetus, already on the run from the Catholic Church for his radical views of God, tried to slip through Geneva on his way to Italy. Unfortunately for him, he was recognized and arrested. With Calvin’s active participation, Servetus was tried for heresy using the same law codes and judicial theories used by the Catholic Church with the same penalty. He was burned at the stake.

Calvin’s involvement in the proceedings against Servetus made his death a high-profile affair, prominent among the many thousands of executions of Catholics and Protestants during the Reformation era. It served notice that Christianity in its revised forms was going to be just as intolerant as under the Catholic monopoly. The new Protestant establishments followed the same route that the Catholic Church had followed in the previous millennium – get the support of the king, prince or emperor and suppress all competitors.

Like Calvin, Luther believed in theory that honest faith could not be coerced, but at the same time he was certain that he had defined the one true version of Christianity and would accept no deviation. One of Luther’s most famous works was entitled The Freedom of a Christian; Calvin also wrote about Christian liberty. But what they meant was that by adhering to their ideas of belief and worship, one could achieve spiritual freedom, not that one was allowed to come to independent conclusions.

By