Evening star., 1960-09-21

This writer is somewhat
discouraged to read some of
the letters regarding the re-
ligion of the Democratic can
didate. He thought that
when his Catholic forebears
established in Maryland a
haven for those Of all faiths
who were prosecuted for
their religious beliefs the
world would know that Cath
olic Americans had led the
way to the ideal of separa-
ton of church and state
and would be given credit for
doing so. The colony of
Maryland was the place
> where religious liberation
and separation Of church and
state was for the first time
in the New World formally
recognized as a policy of
government.
During the Revolution,
both my Catholic and Prot
estant ancestors fought and
bled, some at Long Island
and the Brandywine, others
at Camden and CoWpens.
Again there were members of
both religious groups under
arms in 1872 and in the 1840S.
In 1860 my two grand.
fathers, one Protestant, one
Catholic, fought, one for the
North, one for the South and
the Protestant fought hard in
the political arena against
the Know-Nothing Move
ment, to insure my other
grandfather all his rights
and liberties guaranteed un-
der the Constitution.
Now, after swearing to up
hold the Constitution and
having served in the naval
amphibious forces in the
South Pacific for several
bloody years in the last war,
it is with diSmay I read
these letters. l thought my
ancestors had settled these
matters long ago. I thought
that the renowned Daniel
Carroll of Maryland had
shown by his work on the
First Amendment to the Con-
stitution, the foundations of
American religious liberties,
where Catholics stood. How
ever. I expect all ages and
times must fight again the
battle against intolerance.
History has proven that good
things once obtained must be
carefully guarded. I call on
ProteStants, Jews and Cath
olicS to join hands to con-
demn those who would make
a religious test necessary to
the holding of public Office.
Frederick L. Mccoy.
Scotland, Md.
y 4 80
1t has been deeply dis
tressing to the leaders of the
National Conference of Citi-
zens for Religious Freedom
that the Rev. DR.. Norman
Vincent Peale has become the
target of such severe criticism
because of the relatively mi
nor role which he played in
presiding at a session of the
Washington meeting on Sep
tember 7.
DR.. Peale had no RESPONSE
bility for calling the meeting
or organizing it and he had
no part in formulating the
statement which was issued
by the conference. On Sep
tember 10, he sent a telegram
to our Office indicating that
he could not participate in
any further activities of the
group.
1t is evident that there is
determination in some quar-
ters to use this occasion of
DR.. Peale's participation in
the conference in order to
discredit the long record of
effectiveness Of DR.. Peale's
ministry and concerted eff
forts toward interfaith un-
derStanding.
The spirit of the conference
and the statement which is
sued from it have been delib-
erately misinterpreted in
many quarters. It is to be
hoped that more mature
evaluation will be forthcom-
ing from those sources which
have been so bitterly critical.
The Rev. Donald H. Gill.
Executive Director. Citizens
for Religious Freedom.
II 4 u 4
1t is most unfair to criti-
cize Senator Kennedy for
his religion. 1t is also absurd,
as there are so many legiti-
mate criticisms that can be
used against him: His only
fair record in Congress, his
failure to lead the Demo-
cratic Senators in the past
short session of Congress, his