New England -- History -- Colonial period, ca. 1600-1775
In the meantime, Mrs. Hutchinson had been brought to trial. When, at its
beginning, she asked what law had been broken, the Court answered, “the
fifth commandment,” which enjoined her to honor father and mother,
whereas she had brought reproach upon the “fathers of the
commonwealth.”[418] When the trial was over, and the sentence given that
she should be “banished from out of our jurisdiction as being a woman
not fit for our society,” she said, “I desire to know wherefore I am
banished.” “Say no more,” answered the Governor; “the Court knows
wherefore and is satisfied.”
Footnote 418:
Adams, _Antinomianism_, pp. 165, 237. Two reports of the trial are
given in that volume, pp. 157-284.
It was evident now that no voice could be raised in criticism of any
acts of the civil or ecclesiastical authorities, and that the minds and
lives of the ten thousand or more inhabitants of Massachusetts had come
wholly under the control of their rulers. One man, who with a group of
people undertook to organize a church without having secured the
permission of the magistrates and clergy, was fined £20 and imprisoned
“during the pleasure of Court.” Hugh Buet, being found guilty of
“heresy,” was condemned to leave the colony within three weeks or be
hanged. Two others were imprisoned for criticizing the government and
clergy; and, for the same offense, Katherine Finch was ordered to be
whipped.[419] In 1635, a law had been passed making church attendance
compulsory for all inhabitants, under pain of fine and imprisonment.
Three years later, it was enacted that every resident, whether a freeman
and church member or not, should be taxed for the support of the
ministers. In the Old World, the churches had been satisfied with
excommunication, but in Massachusetts, a law was now passed that, if any
person was excommunicated by the church, he must endeavor to have
himself restored within six months, under penalty of “fine,
imprisonment, banishment, or further.”[420] That ominous “further” was
evidently intended to mean death, and it is difficult to conceive of a
measure more conducive to the rearing of a race of conforming
hypocrites.
Footnote 419:
_Massachusetts Records_, vol. I, pp. 252, 312, 262, 269, 234.
Footnote 420:
_Ibid._, pp. 140, 240, 242.
The policy so ruthlessly followed by the leaders can hardly be excused
by attributing it to the spirit of the age or to the necessity of
maintaining civil order. They were all familiar with the example of
religious toleration in Holland; and in neither Plymouth, Rhode Island,
nor Connecticut was church membership a legal requisite for the
franchise. Moreover, Massachusetts, only a few years later, in annexing
the northern settlements, permitted their inhabitants to vote without
being church members, although denying that privilege to her own
citizens.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account