The Puritans left their native England and came to the
"out- side of the world," as they called it, that they might enjoy liberty
to worship God according to the way which they deemed right. They had
discovered that they themselves were entitled to toleration. They felt that
the restraints laid upon themselves were very unjust and very grievous. But
their light as yet led them no further. They had not discovered that people
who differed from them were as well entitled to be tolerated as they
themselves were. We have no right to blame them for their backwardness.
Simple as it seems, men have not all found out, even yet, that every one of
them is fully entitled to think for himself.
1631 A.D.
And thus it happened that, before the Pilgrims had
enjoyed for many years the cheerful liberty of their new home, doctrines
raised their heads among them which they felt themselves bound to suppress.
One February day there stepped ashore at Boston a young man upon whose
coming great issues depended. his name was Roger Williams. He was a
clergyman—"godly and zealous"—a man of rare virtue and power. Cromwell
admitted him, in later years, to a considerable measure of intimacy. He was
the friend of John Milton—in the bright days of the poet's youth, ere yet
"time ever-during dark " surrounded him. From him Milton acquired his
knowledge of time Dutch language. He carried with him to the New World
certain strange opinions. Long thought had satisfied him that in regard to
religious belief and worship man is responsible to God alone. No man, said
Williams, is entitled to lay compulsion upon another man in regard to
religion. The civil power has to do only with the "bodies and goods and
outward estates" of men. In the domain of conscience God is the only ruler.
New England was not able to receive these sentiments. Williams became
minister at Salem, where he was held in high account. In time his opinions
drew down upon him the unfavourable notice of the authorities. The General
Court of Massachusetts brought him to trial for the errors of his belief.
His townsmen and congregation deserted him. His wife reproached him bitterly
with the evil he was bringing upon his family. Mr. Williams could do no
otherwise. He must testify with his latest breath, if need be, against the
"soul oppression" which he saw around him. The court heard him, discovered
error in his opinions, declared him guilty, and pronounced upon him sentence
of banishment.
All honour to this good and brave, if somewhat
eccentric man, lie of all the men of his time saw most clearly the beauty of
absolute freedom in matters of conscience. He went forth from Salem. lie
obtained a grant of land from the Indians, and he founded the State of Rhode
Island. Landing one day from a boat in which he explored his new
possessions, he climbed a gentle slope, and rested with his companions
beside a spring. It seemed to him that the capital of his infant State ought
to be here. He laid the foundations of his city, which lie named Providence,
in grateful recognition of the power which had guided his uncertain steps.
his settlement was to be "a shelter for persons distressed for conscience."
Most notably has it been so. Alone of all the States of Christendom, Rhode
Island has no taint of persecution in her statute-book or in her history.
Massachusetts continued to drive out her heretics. Rhode Island took them
in. They might err in their interpretation of Scripture. Pity for themselves
if they did so. But while they obeyed the laws, they might interpret
Scripture according to the light they had. Many years after, Mr. Williams
became President of the colony which he had founded. The neighbour- ing
States were at that time sharply chastising the Quakers with lash and
branding-iron and gibbet. llhode Island was invited to join in the
persecution. Mr. Williams replied that he had no law whereby to punish any
for their belief "as to salvation and an eternal condition." He abhorred the
doctrines of the Quakers. In his seventy-third year he rowed thirty miles in
an open boat to wage a public debate with some of the advocates of the
system. Thus and thus only could he resist the progress of opinions which he
deemed pernicious. In beautiful consistency and completeness stands out to
the latest hour of his long life this good man's loyalty to the absolute
liberty of the human conscience.
1651 A.D.
And thus, too, it happened that when seven or eight men
began to deny that infants should be baptized, New England never doubted
that she did right in forcibly trampling out their heresy. The
heretics had started a meeting of their own, where they might worship God
apart from those who baptized their infants. One Sabbath morning the
constable invaded their worship and forcibly bore them away to church. Their
deportment there was not unsuitable to the manner of their inbringing. They
audaciously clapped on their hats while the minister prayed, and made no
secret that they deemed it sin to join in the services of those who
practised infant baptism. For this "separation of themselves from God's
people" they were put on trial. They were fined, and some of the more
obdurate among them were ordered to be "well whipped." We have no reason to
doubt that this order was executed in spirit as well as in letter. And then
a law went forth that every man who openly condemned the baptizing of
infants should suffer banishment. Thus resolute were the good men of New
England that the right which they had come so far to enjoy should not be
enjoyed by any one who saw a different meaning from theirs in any portion of
the Divine Word.
1656 A.D.
Thus, too, when Massachusetts had reason to apprehend
the coming of certain followers of the Quaker persuasion, she was smitten
with a great fear. A fast-day was proclaimed, that the alarmed people
might "seek the face of God in reference to the abounding of errors,
especially those of the Ranters and Quakers." As they fasted, a ship was
nearing their shores with certain Quaker women on board. These unwelcome
visitors were promptly seized and lodged in prison; their books were burned
by the hangman; they themselves were sent away home by the ships which
brought them. All ship-masters were strictly forbidden to bring Quakers to
'the colony. A poor woman, the wife of a London tailor, left her husband and
her children, to bring, as she said, a message from the Lord to New England.
Her trouble was but poorly bestowed; for they to whom her message came
requited her with twenty stripes and instant banishment. The banished
Quakers took the earliest opportunity of finding their way back. Laws were
passed dooming to death all who ventured to return. A poor fanatic was
following his plough in distant Yorkshire, when the word of the Lord came to
him saying, "Go to Boston." He went, and the ungrateful men of Boston hanged
him. Four persons in all suffered death. Many were whipped. Some had their
cars cut off. But public opinion, which has always been singularly humane in
America, began to condemn these foolish cruelties.
1661 A.D.
And the Quakers had friends at home—friends who had
access at Court. There came a letter in the King's name directing that the
authorities of New England should " forbear to proceed further against the
Quakers." That letter came by the hands of a Quaker who was under sentence
of death if he dared to return. The authorities could not but receive
it—could not but give effect to it. The persecution ceased; and with it may
be said to close, in America, all forcible interference with the right of
men to think for themselves.
The Quakers, as they are known to us, are of all sects
the least offensive. A persecution of this serene, thoughtful, self-
restrained people, may well surprise us. But, injustice to New England, it
must be told that the first generation of Quakers differed extremely from
succeeding generations. They were a fanatical people - extravagant,
disorderly, rejecters of lawful authority. A people more intractable, more
unendurable by any government, never lived. They were guided by an "inner
light," which habitually placed them at variance with the Jaws of the
country in which they lived, as well as with the most harmless social
usages. George Fox declared that "the Lord forbade him to put off his hat to
any man." his followers were inconveniently and provokingly aggressive. They
invaded public worship. They openly expressed their contempt for the
religion of their neighbours. They perpetually came with "messages from the
Lord," which it was not pleasant to listen to. They appeared in public
places very imperfectly attired, thus symbolically to express and to rebuke
the spiritual nakedness of the time. After a little, when their zeal allied
itself with discretion, they became a most valuable element in American
society. But we can scarcely wonder that they created alarm at first. The
men of New England took a very simple view of the subject. They had bought
and paid for every acre of soil which they occupied. Their country was a
homestead from which they might exclude whom they chose. They would not
receive men whose object was to overthrow all their institutions, civil and
religious. It was a mistake, but a most natural mistake. Long afterwards,
when New England saw her error, she nobly made what amends she could, by
giving compensation to the representatives of those Quakers who had suffered
in the evil times.
|