USA > Massachusetts > Commonwealth history of Massachusetts, colony, province and state, volume 1 > Part 36
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27 | Part 28 | Part 29 | Part 30 | Part 31 | Part 32 | Part 33 | Part 34 | Part 35 | Part 36 | Part 37 | Part 38 | Part 39 | Part 40 | Part 41 | Part 42 | Part 43 | Part 44 | Part 45 | Part 46 | Part 47 | Part 48 | Part 49 | Part 50 | Part 51 | Part 52 | Part 53 | Part 54
390
RELIGIOUS FREEDOM
College, Cambridge, man and a man of great ability. He had been trained as a lawyer. It is difficult to think that he never reflected upon the action here taken.
When in later years, demand was made upon the part of the dissentients to see the charter, that demand was refused. He and his companions had left the country because, they were not sufficiently free to worship according to their own con- sciences. Many Non-conformists had, however, remained be- hind to continue the same struggle. Persecution was occa- sional. Yet, except for the disabilities of Roman Catholics inherited from an earlier period, there was in England at this time no theoretical denial of civil rights to all dissenters.
In mitigation of this judgment, it is perhaps just again to refer to the view of Scripture which the men of the original groups unquestionably held. It had not been the purpose of these men merely to set up a church. They had desired to es- tablish a Scriptural commonwealth. Channing quotes a sug- gestive passage from Charles Chauncey, president of Harvard College, "If the establishing of a Bible commonwealth was permissible, this was the best means which could be devised to carry out the scheme, since it placed the government in the hands of those who were interested in the welfare of the par- ticular church which they had come over to nourish."
FAITH OF THE LATER COLONISTS
Finally, we cannot suppose that such numbers as those above cited, streaming to these shores in the first thirteen years, were all animated by zeal either for the Non-conform- ist church or the Bible Commonwealth. It was a period of stimulation of colonization from many countries in Europe, and from no country so much as from England. This was be- cause of England's mastery of the sea, achieved since the Ar- mada, because of her huge landed possessions on the Atlantic seaboard, and because of the political, as well as the religious, unrest at home. There must have been thousands of those who came to the Massachusetts Bay Colony in those early years whose purpose was merely to better their condition.
The limitation of participation in the government is explic- able if the members of the original group felt that they must hold hard to their ideal. It does not admit of doubt that
1
RELIGIOUS LIBERTY
391
the best of the members of the church were by far the largest part of the best element in the community. Despite the er- rors which it is part of the purpose of this chapter to discuss, it may fairly be questioned whether any public in the early stages of any frontier settlement showed higher qualities than did the body of citizens in the Massachusetts Bay Colony. Proof of this is the influence which they have left behind them in this country and the ideals which they have set before other lands.
RELIGIOUS LIBERTY OF THE TIME
Passing allusion has been made to the beginnings of pro- test as to the use made by the authorities of the power en- trusted to them. The remainder of this chapter will be en- gaged with the history of some of the more important of these opposing movements. In some cases, as in that of the Quak- ers, the demand was really for a larger and truer liberty. In some cases, it was simply a cry for liberty for a different group. The time came when considerable groups of those who held opposing religious opinions could no longer be driven out, nor even be put at a disadvantage. Then tolerance was forced; and, at last the sentiment of religious liberty took the form in which it is expressed in the American Constitution.
This result came a century after the close of the period assigned to this chapter. It was a movement, moreover, which covered the whole eastern portion of our country, and not merely the Massachusetts colonies. Also, it must be conceded that, before that issue was reached, religion had lost its con- trolling position among the interests of the world. This was true in America almost as much as in England or Germany, though not so much so as in France.
Down to 1689, it is evident that even in decisions which seem to us deplorable the magistrates were fairly well sup- ported by public opinion. This was more true in the early decades than in the later ones. The colonies were as yet oligarchies, and the Bay Colony had a distinctly aristocratic trend, much more so than Plymouth. Even so, Winthrop and Bradford could not have maintained themselves so long and so uninterruptedly as the heads of their respective communi- ties had not the mass of their fellow-citizens been behind them.
392
RELIGIOUS FREEDOM
This is by no means to say that majorities are always right. In some of the controversies they were clearly wrong. Never- theless, it is by majorities that, in the long run, the action of communities is guided in which there is any semblance of freedom.
The episodes which we should call infringements of religious liberty occurring in Plymouth between 1620 and 1630 are but few and of no great significance. Plymouth was small and remained so. It was homogeneous. There was little to attract adventurers. The Rev. John Lyford, a clergyman of the Church of England, arriving at Plymouth, joined the Pilgrim Church, confessing his "former irregular religious walking." He held public services however apart from the others and according to the rites of the Church of England. He was proved to be sending secret information to the home authorities. Bradford therefore seized his letters. He was banished from the colony and, no long time thereafter, died in Virginia.
The case of Thomas Morton, gentleman, could hardly be called one of religious persecution. The merry life which he and his compeers led at Merrymount, near Quincy, was not to the taste of the sterner company at Plymouth. Morton must have made a mistake in choosing his location. Dissipa- tion was alleged. What was proved was that he sold both liquor and firearms to the Indians. Driven from Merrymount by Bradford, he returned and Endecott deported him.
The case of Sir Christopher Gardiner, Knight, was even more clearly a mere case of maintaining order. His estab- lishment included, besides some men of doubtful repute, a "comely young woman," whom, when his troubles began he left upon her own resources. The Plymouth Colony, es- pecially Duxbury, brought itself no honor in its treatment of some of the Quakers who fled thither from Boston. In the matters with which we are concerned, as in many others, its history even before the union with Massachusetts comes more and more to be merged in that of the Bay Colony.
FAITH OF ROGER WILLIAMS (1632-1635)
The case of Roger Williams is on a very different footing. It is the first of the cases to which attaches an interest almost
393
ROGER WILLIAMS
equally painful whether one thinks of him or of the colony. Roger Williams came on the Lyon in the spring of 1632. He was received as a "godly minister." A little later it was proposed that he should take the place of the Rev. Mr. Wil- son during the necessary absence of the latter in England. Williams declined, declaring that he "durst not officiate to an unseparated people." He esteemed the Church of England to be utterly unscriptural. The founders were indeed Non-con- formists, but they did not share so extreme a view of the Established Church. Besides, they were committing them- selves to a religious establishment of their own.
The logic of Williams' contention would have made him an enemy of any establishment. He was convinced that the State has no right to compel anyone to go to church services, or to tax all citizens for support of the Church. Williams doubted the rightfulness of "praying with the unregenerate." This seemed to militate against the holding of any religious services. He betook himself to Plymouth. Here the tradition was of separatism, but Williams was unsympathetic with this group on other counts. Bradford records a measured judg- ment of him: "He had many precious parts, but was of un- settled judgment." Dissentions arose. Bradford again re- cords : "He left us somewhat abruptly," returning to Salem.
Here he spoke against the king and the patent and threw doubt upon the tenure by which the colonists held their land. He felt that they ought to hold their titles from the Indians. The authorities were demanding an oath of fidelity. Wil- liams thought it sinful to take such an oath. The authorities ought not to punish sins under the first four Commandments. These were only upon the individual conscience and against God. Here is certainly a curious mingling of surprising fore- cast of liberal opinion with other convictions and some per- sonal qualities which made Williams difficult as a citizen in that place and time. Upon occasion of a dispute between the Salem men and the Court on the score of boundaries, Wil- liams resigned his pastorate. He expressed his opinion of the government.
In the autumn of 1635, it was decided to deport him. He betook himself to the wilderness. He settled at the head of Narragansett Bay, calling his place of refuge "Providence."
394
RELIGIOUS FREEDOM
He bought land of the Indians. Few persons followed him from Salem. Traders came. The settlement which gradually formed itself was less of a government than any of which we have record of that time in these parts. Williams would min- ister to any who came to hear him, but as yet no church was established. No man was pledged to support religion or to attend services. Providence was not a religious settlement in the sense of Plymouth and Boston. Or rather it was the refuge of representatives of a variety of religiously minded people some of whom found settlement elsewhere difficult.
All this time Williams had not proclaimed himself a Baptist. Some of the opinions above expressed date from the teaching of Browne in the time of Elizabeth. The rest can most of them be traced to the utterances of Independents of Baptist conviction in London in 1611. These did also object to in- fant baptism and argue for immersion. It seems to have been after his settlement in Providence that Williams became convinced of the correctness of Baptist views upon these points, as well, and proclaimed himself as of that persuasion. The logic of his own temperament led him, however, after only a few months, to withdraw from this allegiance, although there is no evidence that he changed his view. Allegiances were not for Williams. He was not only a Separatist, but a solitary. When he was no longer in spiritual communion with any, he communed with God alone. For the rest of his life he was a "Seeker."
As to the validity of many of Williams' contentions, no modern mind is in doubt. Nor can one rid himself of the sense of surprise and, equally, of admiration, as he reads these bold statements of principles which were often far in advance of his time. Nor does the fact that many of these things had been said before detract from Williams' originality. Apropos of the question between Independents and Presbyterians, Cromwell is quoted as having said in 1655, "It is ungenerous to ask liberty and not give it. What greater hypocrisy, for those who were oppressed by bishops, themselves to become great oppressors as soon as the yoke is removed."
Williams had been saying something like this with his whole life. In the eyes of posterity, with whom these ideals have became commonplace, it must always remain distressing to see
THE BLOODY TENENT
H
YET
More Bloody :
BY
Mr Cottons endevour to walh it white in the BLOOD of the LAMBE;
Of whofe precious Blood, fpilt in the Blood of his Servants; and
Of the blood of Millions (pilt in former and later Wars for Confcience fake, THAT Moft Bloody Tenent of Perfecution for caufe of Confcience, upon a fecond Tryal, is found now more apparently and more notorioufly guilty.
st:
In this Rejoynder to Mr Cotten, are principally
I. The Nature of Perfecution, II. The Power of the Civill SwordsExamined; in Spirituals S III. The Parliaments permifion of Juftified. Diffenting Confciences
Alfo(as a Teftimony to M' Clarks Narrative)is added a Letter to Mr Endicet Governor of the Mafachufets in N. E.
By R. WILLIAMS of Providence in New-England.
London, Printed for Giles Calvert, and are to be fold at the black-fpread-Eagle at the Weft-end of Pauls , 1652.
From the Harvard University Library
ROGER WILLIAMS IN CONTROVERSY
395
ANNE HUTCHINSON
the protagonist of them suffer for them and those in power fail to rise to them. But that is history, or, at least, it is a part of history. We may censure Winthrop and his com- peers, although they do not seem to have been vindictive to- ward Williams. We need not be too sure about Williams' unhappiness. We regret his isolation, but Williams was never happy except when he was isolated.
FAITH OF ANNE HUTCHINSON (1634-1643)
The next religious difficulty which arose in the Bay Colony presents in some ways a marked contrast. In this case, the leader was a woman, Mrs. Anne Hutchinson, distinctly a per- sonage, of intelligence and will and social position. She did not share Williams' aversion to society. On the contrary, she found her happiness in gathering society about her. When she departed across the border she drew an appreciable portion of society after her. Williams was sometimes voluble to his own detriment, but in his own way. Mrs. Hutchinson was voluble in a different way. The number of creative ideas which she offered was small. The animosity which she aroused, and perhaps reciprocated, was proportionately great. The personal element in the controversy came to be preponder- ant. It was a struggle for ascendancy which in another time and place might have been fought out upon some other sub- ject.
Her husband is described as a "peacable man of good es- tate." They exercised hospitality and Mrs. Hutchinson was devoted to good works. Winthrop says that she was "of a haughty and fierce carriage, of a nimble wit and active spirit, and a very voluble tongue." This is one of several indications that Winthrop disliked her. She assembled her friends at her home, edifying them with comment upon the ministers' utterances. The Boston church had two ministers, John Wil- son and John Cotton. Wilson, although the younger man, was the senior in office. Cotton was the abler man. Mrs. Hut- chinson seems at first to have impressed him. When Wilson preached she sometimes left her pew.
Sir Henry Vane was drawn to Mrs. Hutchinson's circle. Vane had been honored, almost at once upon his arrival, by being elected Governor, in deference perhaps to his high sta-
396
RELIGIOUS FREEDOM
tion, in appreciation also of his high qualities. Winthrop, as a kind of anchor to windward, was elected Deputy-governor. Vane and Mrs. Hutchinson seem for the moment to have car- ried everything before them.
The main tenet in Mrs. Hutchinson's religion seems to have been the doctrine that she herself received inspiration from on high. Thus moved, she passed vigorous judgments, especially upon Wilson and Winthrop. No principle was more alien to non-conformity in general than was this of private illumina- tion. There had been bad experiences with this doctrine, among Catholics before the Reformation and in Protestant- ism, as at Münster. It was in contradiction with the prevail- ing conception of the authority of Scripture. Perhaps the oracular view of Scripture had been accepted, in some meas- ure, to escape the vagaries of people who claimed immediate inspiration. Mrs. Hutchinson's influence threatened to be- come subversive of the government as well as of the church.
The period of her ascendancy was, however, short. In the election of 1637, Winthrop was again chosen Governor. No representative of the Hutchinsonian faction was returned to office. Vane sailed for England. He was very young. Per- haps he felt that he had made an error. The situation in Eng- land was now calling men of his sort. Even in company of men far greater than himself, he seems however not to have been easy to work with. Cotton had completely recovered from any illusions which he may have had. The General Court in November of that year, determined "to send away" some of the more prominent of the troublers of the peace.
The governing body cannot escape censure as to its legal proceedings. The public examination of Mrs. Hutchinson was not a trial. It served only to explain to the public a decision already arrived at. Mrs. Hutchinson poured oil on the flames by her freedom of speech. When she demanded to know why she was being banished, the Governor replied, "Say no more. The Court knows and is satisfied." Some of her followers were disfranchised, some were fined.
Mrs. Hutchinson was however not to be banished before she was dealt with "in a church way," as the phrase was. Men whose names we honor, Wilson and Davenport, Shepard and Cotton, used language strong even for ecclesiastics in cutting
397
HENRY DUNSTER
her off from the congregation of the faithful. She was not silent under their censure. It is an affair upon which one's mind does not rest quietly, no matter how great the provoca- tion. If the system to which the rulers had committed them- selves was not actually at stake, at least the ascendancy of the persons who had made these commitments was in play. As things were in their world, one cannot be sorry that the authorities triumphed. One could wish that they had tri- umphed with more of the grace of which they frequently spoke.
Mrs. Hutchinson and her followers betook themselves, not indeed to Williams, at Providence, but to the northern end of Rhode Island, at Portsmouth. A quiet life was not for the prophetess. In 1642, on the death of her husband, she re- moved from Narragansett Bay and settled at the western end of Long Island. There she lived with her children and serv- ants for about a year. Then the whole household, to the number of sixteen persons, were murdered by the Indians. John Winthrop commented upon this providence of God in language which has been described as the most regrettable which he has left on record.
HENRY DUNSTER ON BAPTISM (1640-1654)
We may begin what we have to say of the treatment ac- corded the Baptists by relating the experience of the Rev. Henry Dunster, President of Harvard College. He is the most notable person whose troubles came upon him because of his profession of the particular tenets of that faith. Fur- thermore, his connection with the college, founded by the General Court in 1636, the name of which was changed to Harvard College in 1638, and which was the object of the pride and concern of the colony, gives to his case a significance transcending that of the humble men and women who suffered things different from those which he was called to bear.
Dunster was of Magdalen College, Cambridge. Cotton Mather speaks of him as having exercised his ministry in Eng- land. He must have begun early. He arrived in Boston in 1640, at the age, it is said, of twenty-one. He was called to the presidency of the college in August of that year. The author of The Wonder-working Provindence in early en-
398
RELIGIOUS FREEDOM
thusiasm wrote, "Mr. Dunster is now President of the College, fitted from the Lord for the work and, by those who have skill that way, reported to be an able proficient, as well in languages as in the truths of Christ." Quincy in his history of Harvard College says, "No man ever questioned his talents, learning, exemplary fidelity and usefulness." In another place Quincy says, "He rendered to the College in a succession of years a series of official services well directed, unwearied, and altogether inestimable."
The General Court had passed in 1644 a statute relating to Baptists, the preamble of which began thus: "For as much as experience hath plentifully and often proved that, since the first rising of the Anabaptists, about one hundred years since, these have been incendiaries of commonwealths and in- fectors of persons in the main matter of religion and troublers of churches in all places where they have been. ": the statute concludes :- "it is ordered and decreed that if any person or persons within this jurisdiction either openly con- demn or oppose the baptizing of infants or shall deny the ordinance of magistracy or their lawful right to pun- ish the outward breaches of the First Table every such person or persons shall be banished from the colony."
Roger Williams would have made himself liable under this statute on several counts, had it existed in his time. In his Massachusetts period, he had not yet gone over to the specific view of the rite of baptism. Men had now come into the Colony who professed these latter views with vigor, while they · conducted themselves in an unoffensive manner upon the other points mentioned. In the year 1651, three Baptists, Clark, a man of some distinction, founder of the Baptist church of Newport, and with him Crandall and Holmes, visiting Lynn, were accused of propaganda and seized by the authorities. Two of them escaped with heavy fines. Holmes was impris- oned and later publicly flogged.
Whether this spectacle moved Dunster, we do not know. What he now courageously asserted was that he had been led to look into the matter of baptism. He declared that he found "that all instituted gospel worship hath some expressed word of Scripture, but paedo-baptism hath none." In October, 1654, he was forced to resign the presidency of the college,
399
THE BAPTISTS
after having been indicted "for disturbing the ordinance of infant baptism in the Cambridge church." Cotton Mather says, "His unhappy entanglement in the snare of Anabaptism filled the Overseers with uneasy fears lest the students by his means should come to be ensnared." Dunster removed to Scituate, taking the ministry of the church in that place. There he died in 1659.
It is clear that Dunster had made himself liable under one clause of the statute. Perhaps that was enough for his opponents. It is not clear from this passage of Mather's whether the thing uppermost in the mind of the Overseers was the specific matter of the rite of baptism, or whether behind it lay also a vague association with the lawlessness which the word Anabaptist seems to have conjured up. Did not Mather know the difference between Anabaptists of the violent sort and Baptists who were but an offshoot from his own Inde- pendency, the sobriety of whose utterance in the confession of the first Arminian Baptist Church in London in 1611 is note- worthy?
THE BAPTISTS (1654-1680)
To the first of these Confessions belongs the really prophetic cast which we noted in the teachings of Williams. Dunster was apparently a man of circumspection and of high sense of responsibility. He had voluntarily announced his change of view in face of the obloquy which he knew this announce- ment would bring. He gave the very reason which his op- ponents gave for their view, namely, his understanding of Scripture. It almost seems as if there must have been other motives at work.
For the authorities of the college proceeded at once to elect as his successor, Charles Chauncy, a fellow of Trinity Col- lege, Cambridge, of whom it was well known that he held to baptism by immersion only. One hears nothing in his case about the fact that any Baptist might be suspected of the nondescript political views of Anabaptists. Long afterward in a letter to Increase Mather, one Cobbett, a minister of Ips- wich, wrote, "Their very principle of making infant baptism a nullity doth make at once all our churches and our religious and civil state and quality and all the officers and members
400
RELIGIOUS FREEDOM
thereof to be unbaptized and so to be no Christians." That was a possible inference, but there is no evidence that it was in the minds of the men of Dunster's time.
There was a little group of Baptists in East Boston which met in the house of Thomas Gould. They had suffered fines and imprisonment though we do not read of whippings or banishment. In 1670 they bought land in Boston with the purpose of building a church. This the General Court for- bade them to do. They do not seem to have attempted to carry out their purpose until 1680. By that time Charles II, in the interest of Episcopacy, had directed the Colonial au- thorities to allow all Protestants liberty of conscience. The Court, however, acted upon the colonial law instead, ordering the marshall to nail up the doors of the meeting house. Rus- sell, who became the second minister of this church, wrote an account of the wrongs of Baptists in Boston which was printed in England. It called out a protest from English Bap- tists wherein they say, "For one Protestant congregation to persecute another where there is no pretense of infallibility in the decision of controversies, seems more unreasonable than the cruelties of the Church of Rome toward those that depart from her superstitions." Times were changed in England since 1640. The tide was running strongly in favor of the Established Church. Great hardships were suffered by dis- senters. Nothing undermined the entrenchment of the stand- ing order in Massachusetts or shook the Puritans of New England as the Restoration was shaking the men of the Com- monwealth and Protectorate in England.
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.