© 2010 Christy K Robinson
This article is copyrighted. Copying, even to your genealogy pages, is prohibited by US and international law. You may "share" it with the URL link because it preserves the author's copyright notice and the source of the article.
All rights reserved. This book or blog article, or any portion thereof may not be reproduced or used in any manner whatsoever without the express written permission of the author except for the use of brief quotations in a book review.
"The
sentence was passed upon you; you must return to the prison and there
remain until tomorrow at nine o'clock; then from thence you must go to
the gallows, and there be hanged till you are dead." ~Gov John Endicott,
Massachusetts Bay Colony--said to Mary Barrett Dyer, May
31, 1660.
And
on June 1, 1660, Mary was taken from the jailhouse to the gallows on
Boston Neck. So that the large crowd of onlookers would not be able to
hear her voice, drummers accompanied the militia as she walked the mile
to the gallows where she died.
_____________
Mary Dyer was banished from Boston
for expressing her religious beliefs, but kept returning under conviction that she
must speak what God revealed to her. The first occasion was as an
Antinomian in 1638. The Puritans who governed Massachusetts Bay Colony
were themselves refugees from the Anglican repression of Calvinism. They
believed that civil and religious government were one fabric, and based
their civil laws upon the Ten Commandments. They believed also that
they were special and chosen of God, and that their piety and strict
adherence to the Law proved to each other and to God that they were,
indeed, predestined for eternal salvation.
This
may seem foreign to contemporary Protestants and evangelicals who
believe that salvation is only by God’s gift—grace—to anyone and
everyone who accepts the gift. But there are many people and groups
today who say that yes, they’re saved by grace, but because they
love the Lord who saves them, they must “prove” their love by keeping
the law of the Old Testament. They misunderstand Jesus’ statement, “If
you love me, keep my commands,” because it’s taken out of context.
Jesus’ command (not the Ten Commandments) in that context is simply to
love one another as he loves us.
Antinomians believed that the Bible’s entire Old Testament law (nomos
in Greek) was made null and void when Jesus died on the cross. There
was no distinction between the ceremonial regulations (sacrifices and
rituals, clean/unclean activities and foods) and the moral law (Ten
Commandments). Nomos meant the entire kit and caboodle.
As believers in Jesus, Christians are no longer under the covenant of keeping the Law, Antinomians believed.
“For sin shall not be master over you, for you are not under law but under grace.” Romans 6:14
“But now, by dying to what once bound us, we have been released from the law so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit, and not in the old way of the written code.” Romans 7:6
“Through Christ Jesus the law of the Spirit of life set me free from the law of sin and death.” Romans 8:2
“By calling this covenant "new," he has made the first one obsolete; and what is obsolete and aging will soon disappear.” Hebrews 8:13
So
if we don’t keep the old Law any more, are we free to participate in
chaos, and do as we please, hurting ourselves and others? No, says Paul
the apostle. Now we are accountable directly to God himself, subject to
the new Law he writes on our minds and hearts (conscience). We have
lists in the New Testament of behaviors and attitudes which will keep us
from intimacy with God, and keep us from entering his kingdom: murder,
fornication and adultery (sex outside marriage), theft, lying, gossip
and slander, dishonoring our parents, greed, drunkenness, and others.
“For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts [direct
revelation or Inner Light]: and I will be to them a God, and they shall
be to me a people: And they shall not teach every man his neighbour,
and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for all shall know me, from the least to the greatest
[there goes the theory of the Elect]. For I will be merciful to their
unrighteousness, and their sins and their iniquities will I remember no
more.” Hebrews 8:10-12
Here
is where Mary Dyer and other Antinomians based their beliefs that the
old Law was obsolete and useless, and the new Law was personally and
directly revealed to them by the Holy Spirit. In later years, when Mary
espoused the Quaker beliefs, direct revelation was called the Inner
Light.
But back to the Puritans: If you destroy the foundation of their belief, the Law, there is nothing
left to hold onto, because faith in God’s grace is not enough security.
You just cannot have people running around doing as they please,
excusing themselves by saying that God told them to do this or that.
There needs to be a structure! There’s nothing that distinguishes the
law-keepers from the Catholic or apostate-Protestant herds. The entire
multibillion-dollar institution crashes. The worldwide "we're the
exclusive Remnant/Elect of God, and only we will be saved" thing is
gone. They can't handle it spiritually, emotionally, or intellectually.
They also can’t handle it financially. The Massachusetts Bay Colony was a
business venture, chartered by King Charles I.
I
understand, in a way. When you've believed wholeheartedly in God’s
will, that this promise or this distinctive is a special gift to you,
it's part of your very fabric. Pull some threads or cut a hole, and it's
not salvageable. It’s too difficult, and maybe even too late in life,
to start all over and learn everything new, especially when you’ve been
“right.” How does one hold one's head up with constituents,
parishioners, faith adherents? There’s no putting new wine into an old
wineskin or patching a cotton tear with wool. What about prophesied
end-time events? We’ve been denying ourselves and living a hard life,
and these unworthy people get to waltz into heaven while we trudge
there? What about judgment (who flies and who fries)? What if we stop
observing a law-decreed Sabbath on Saturday or Sunday--and start
trusting in God for complete rest from our strivings and a sabbath-rest
that blesses us today and every day? What will distinguish us, the
Remnant and the Elect, from the unwashed and uncouth? We’d have to go
out of business, retrain every pastor, retool every institution from
preschool through university and seminary, and worst of all, change the
minds and hearts of those who have believed what they were taught for
generations. It’s unthinkable!
Puritans were so sure they were “right” that there was no room for dissent.
(This from reformers and dissenters to the Church of England!) There
was no agreeing to disagree. There was only consensus—agreeing to agree.
And if, after being shown your errors in theology and behavior, you
didn’t agree, you’d be punished. The church/state government, and all of
society, was in danger of collapse if people just did and believed as
they wanted.
In
1637-38, Mary and William Dyer and 75 other families followed Anne
Hutchinson in the Antinomian Controversy, and were disfellowshipped
(excommunicated or disfranchised) from the Puritan congregations of Boston.
They moved to Rhode Island and founded two communities, Portsmouth and Newport,
under extremely primitive conditions. They built homes and planted
farms and worshiped according to conscience. Four years later,
Massachusetts Governor Winthrop sent a manuscript to England that was
published as a lurid and vicious description of Mary’s stillborn
anencephalic baby, and Anne Hutchinson's hydatidiform mole pregnancy,
and called them monsters, proof of their heresy in 1637-38. (It was a
Winthrop PR campaign to show his awesomeness and worthiness to be the
governor of the colony.)
In 1652, Mary traveled back to England
and stayed for five years. She followed the doctrines of George Fox,
founder of the Quaker (Religious Society of Friends) movement, and
sailed back to Rhode Island via Boston Harbor
in 1657. She and her friends were arrested from shipboard and taken to
prison, where they stayed for several months. Their crime: being
Quakers, when the colony, now governed by John Endicott, had ruled that
Quakers would be imprisoned and banished—after having been dragged
behind a wagon and scourged, and losing their ears. One of Mary’s
shipmates, a woman, was stripped to the waist and scourged, and another
was sent back to England, but Mary was released to her husband in Rhode Island as a professional courtesy because he was a government official—and not a Quaker.
Mary returned to Massachusetts in 1658 to visit her imprisoned Quaker friends and was expelled. She preached in New Haven, Connecticut, and was arrested and expelled from that colony. In 1659, she learned that two Quaker men had been imprisoned in Boston,
and she walked through the forest on Indian trails to visit and comfort
them in prison. She was arrested again, and tried in Governor
Endecott’s court. Mary was convicted and actually sent to the gallows.
Her friends were hanged before she was placed in the noose with a cloth
over her face—but was reprieved on condition she would not return to Boston.
She actually seemed disappointed in the reprieve and "rescue" by her
husband and son, as she was protesting religious repression and
willing to die with her Quaker colleagues. She was admonished not to
return upon pain of death.
After six months of preaching to the Indians and Quakers of Long Island and Connecticut, she went back to Boston without telling her husband or six children who lived in Rhode Island.
Her Quaker brothers and sisters were being tortured and their property
confiscated. She went directly to the jail and asked to speak to the
prisoners. She was arrested on May 21 during their annual elections and General Court, jailed, convicted
again, and hanged on June 1, 1660.
Analyzing
her beliefs and letters, Mary Dyer seemed to have the biblical book of
Hebrews written on her heart. This passage jumped out at me today as I
was researching this post. I’ve bolded the phrases that apply to Mary,
and you can see how closely they align with her actions just before her
arrests, imprisonments, and execution.
“Remember those earlier days after you had received the light [direct revelation of God, or the Quaker “Inner Light”]
when you stood your ground in a great contest in the face of suffering.
Sometimes you were publicly exposed to insult and persecution; at other
times you stood side by side with those who were so treated. You sympathized with those in prison and joyfully accepted
the confiscation of your property, because you knew that you yourselves
had better and lasting possessions. So do not throw away your
confidence; it will be richly rewarded. You need to persevere so that when you have done the will of God, you will receive what he has promised.” Hebrews 10:32-36
Mary
joyfully accepted her martyrdom, believing that her death would so
shock the system that Endecott and his court would have to back down
from their repression. She died so that others could live and worship in
freedom of conscience. She did not die in vain.
The dedication on Mary's statue in Boston
says "WITNESS FOR RELIGIOUS FREEDOM." Mary died for the basic human
right to worship and express her religious beliefs as she felt called by
God to do. She was the only woman hanged for religious beliefs, and
only one more Quaker man was hanged after her, because of outcry in both
New England and Britain over their persecution and executions.
Massachusetts Bay Colony, like many business, political, and religious organizations, was dedicated to
control of the institution (self preservation), the church, and its people
en masse. Mary understood that
Jesus came as a man to relate to and save the individual. She and the others died for one of the principles America holds most dear: the
liberty of the individual to follow conscience.
I am grateful to discover this site (via a new page on FaceBook,) and welcome the research which you're sharing, as well as your evident passion and approval for Dyer and her witness. I happen to agree with your assessment of the rigidity of the Puritan Establishment which she defied, and I would extend this to a critique of ANY theocracy. The U.S. Constitution's prohibition of any "religious test" for public office, and the assurance of non-interference by the new federal government in religious matters (neither setting up nor taking down any "establishment of religion") was a radical step then, and is still under assault now, by Theocrats who believe they have a Divine Mandate to govern. Like the Puritans in New England, they claim "religious liberty" only for themselves and not for those they pronounce "wrong." The separation of the concepts of "heresy" and "treason" is America's contribution to the world, and I appeal to all to help maintain that separation. I hope we solemnly undertake to preserve the heritage of Religious Liberty which was purchased with Mary Dyer's life.
ReplyDeleteThank you for your comment, David. I've been watching the theocrats (Moral Majority, the Pat Robertson followers, any think tank or PAC with the word "Family" in it) for 30 years, and have seen them build the mighty alliances with politicians at state and federal levels. They love to quote the "Founding Fathers" of the late 18th century, but fail to notice the very real great-grandparents of the Founding Fathers, who perpetrated repression and torture in the name of God; and they fail to notice what it took for Mary Dyer and the other martyrs to win rights for ALL people. You're right: the fight is not over, and we must remain vigilant about principles of liberty.
DeleteI hope you'll follow this blog and the Mary Dyer Facebook page.
Christy
Great site- I am looking forward to exploring more. I was born in Providence and intend to move back to New England - I was very entranced with the local North Kingstown history when I was there. No one seems to care about it here in Atlanta.
ReplyDeleteI appreciate what you are doing
Thanks for your comment, Scott. There are 70+ articles about the Dyers and their culture in the archive in the margin of this blog. In addition, I've listed some blogs about the time period, AND some suggested reading (the Amazon widgets).
DeleteFor 17th-century historical fiction (though about real people) in the Kingston area, try my friend and author-colleague, Jo Ann Butler, who is writing the third book of a trilogy on the pioneers there. The first 2 are for sale here http://www.malloybooks.com/neverest.html
I've been happily surprised to learn that the articles in this blog have been viewed thousands of times and all over the world, though more, of course, in English-speaking countries.