Entire story from the whole semester. Where we left off on monday. Monday we dealt with how the puritans approached people who engaged in misbehaviors and talked about those and how familiar they were. To anybody walking up and down high street on a friday or saturday night. Okay. And how they approach them, how they dealt with people, who engaged in those behaviors, and why. Why it was so important for them to bring those people back into forward if you will. If possible. If not possible, then to thank you would you please go away. Okay . So, what were going deal with today are larger problems. That are not necessarily individual behaviors, but people who are spousing ideas, and belief systems. And practice them and acting upon them. That are not just misbehaviors. But really question and shake the foundation of puritan society. That whole experiment. What happens when somebody starts to question that. What happens when people start believes and express believes. That run entirely counter to that. Because we talked about remember how important it was to them to make sure they were doing it right. Okay, according to to their understanding of their Christian Faith. They had to do it this particular way. If they didnt do this particular way, then they were going to run the chance of being abandoned by god, right . Which was a horrible thing. One of the most terrifying things they could imagine. So questioning that, is questioning different religious ideas and questioning the entire basis for the thing. And you cant do that in their society. Well talk about that. And particularly were going to look at it from the standpoint of religious freedom. Religious liberty. Did they have it . As we understood it. Or was it something different. Religious liberty with a great big ast risk. Except for xyz. What we find is that the idea of freedom of expression, freedom of conscious freedom of religion was a contested idea as soon as people started getting off the boat. 1 1 1630s. Within a few years people start saying odd things. Different things. Things that threaten the society. Theten the experiment. Contested almost in the beginning. You have people engaging in decent. Saying something is wrong here. This approach that were taking to the Christian Faith and the way we order our society and the basis of understanding something is wrong. Well look at a couple people. As people started to Say Something is wrong here, it didnt take the leaders long to begin to deal with them. Because as one puritan minister said, god nowhere in his world tolerate Christian States to give toleration to adversaries of his truth. If they had the power in their hands to suppress them. Thats not exactly what we would understand as religious liberty from our standpoint from our perspective in this particular year and point in time. This was not flreedom of conscience. They had a different unts r understanding. You were free to believe what they believed. Or you were free to leave. Or to be punished if you refused. Or encouraged to leave. Some very intriguing and sometimes painful ways. Or in some cases, if you were particularly persistent in your refusal to go along, you might be punished be death. So lets talk about a couple of people. I want to talk about three people. Two in depth. And one were going to kind of touch on briefly. In transition. But people who very early started questioning the entire experiment. And what happened to them. What were they saying, what were the criticisms. And how did the puritans hierarchy, society deal with them. Because we have to understand what their doing with people who dont go along to understand how they deal with problems. Because then that will help us understand what happens in 1692. With the witch trials. How does that make sense from their perspective. All right even if it seems insane from ours. All right. Lets talk about a couple people. Some you have heard about before. Some you may not have. Lets talk about a gentleman by the name of Roger Williams. You should have heard about him at some point in your history class. High school or here. The university. He was a charismatic young professor. Cam Bridge University educated. Arrived in Massachusetts Bay colony in 1630s and became the minister out of a town northeast of boston called salem. Salem town not village. Remember we learn quickly they were two different places. Very close by. He was really one of our first true champions in what became the United States of true religious freedom. What we would understand of separation of church and state. Well look at his ideas about that. And how he articulated it. And why he articulated it. And how he got into trouble. Because of it. Very soon he arrives in salem, 1633. By 1634 hes already annoying people. He did not take very long at all to do so. He had a number of ideas that annoyed the leadership. In the colony. Lets talk about those. First of all, he was among people called puritans. And he didnt think they were pure enough. You claimed this name puritans that people used to call you as your own. I dont think youre pure enough. He reminded them, remember how we left england, because we thought there were problems in the church of england. It was not pure enough. There was corruption in it. It participated in our persecution. Well, if that thing that you used to say was so corrupt and foul enough that you left to get away from it, sort of, why are you still attached to it . Why havent you said we are no longer a part of church of england . Why havent you done that yet . If you really want to be pure, what youre going to need to do is repent of that connection. All right. Remembering the words that he that john winter said beforehand. We want to avoid that ship wreck that we used to know. That ship wreck of the church and society is in england. If you really want to be pure, repent of the connection and sever it. Well, thats not what leaders wanted to hear. Being what they call a separatetist. Was not a good thing. Okay . It was not a good thing. The pilgrims were separatist. Its not a good thing to have. He didnt want that. Problem number one, you need to repent of your connection to the church of england. Next thing he thought. Now what i find let me Say Something here. People today are fond of quoting Founding Fathers whoever they are exactly. I think one of the most quotable Founding Fathers that we have, whatever that is, is Roger Williams. Ill share those with you. They are fantastic. You do not have to guess where the man stands. All right, now remember i believe that we talked about and worship attendance being mandatory legally. He had strong issues with that. He denounced mandatory worship attendance. Saying forced worship stinks. In gods nostrils. Come on roger tell us what you think. Youre holding back, man. Forced worship stinks in gods nostrils. He denounced enforced religious conformity. Believe what we believe or go away. Coerced religion he said on good days produces hypocrites. On bad days rivers of blood. Well see in a moment why he says such extreme things about this. Why he is so passionate about it. He said enforced uniformity confound and denies the principles of christianity and civility. No man shall be required to worship or maintain a worship against his will. Okay maintain a worship thats a particular term. That means pay with your tax dollars. Basically. For a church or religious organization to which you do not adhere. Okay . Coerced rely jos con found civil and religious liberty and denies the principles of christianity and civility. He had as he began spouting his believes he had exchanges as you might imagine, with the leaders of community. One of which was john cotton. Who is one of the early ministers in Massachusetts Bay colony. Name spelled just as it sounds. The good reverend cotton on the left. Williams on the right. All right. Ill read it to you in the language it was written and ill translate. Roger williams, if thousand huntest any for the cause of conscience how can thousand say followest the lamb of god who the practice. If you are going after people who are holding to their own religious believes for conscience sake, how in the world can you say you are a follower of the lamb of god . Who himself had problems with people going after authorities going after people for different religious believes. In his interpretation. To which the good reverend john cotton says well people are free, their consciences are free. As long as and i quote their minds are rightly informed. Okay . As long as they have learned this appropriate set of believes, or behaviors, or under religious understanding within that, they are perfectly free. Its like these rightly informed. This proper belief. This proper practices. Are like a fence. You are as free as a bird. Within these. Okay . Just dont try to jump the fence. Do what you wish, but just, you know, stay within this area. Of right belief. Right understanding. Okay . Thats a more positive statement of their understanding of religious liberty than youre free to belief what they believe or get out. Over simplification. But it makes a point. Okay, another thing. Religious government officials had no business getting involved in religious affairs. Keep your hands off. That cannot be a True Religion which needs carnal weapons to uphold it. Anybody want to translate that one for me . That cannot be a True Religion which needs carnal weapons to uphold it. Okay. Yeah, go ahead. Is it like the you saying carnal weapons. So flesh weapons. The things that we as humans have made up. Not spiritual. What sort of can you be more specific . Carnal weapons. Force, coercion. Specifically wielded by whom . The government officials. There you go. If you need government help to prop your religion up, then its really not a True Religion. Is what hes saying here. A True Religion doesnt need that. And thats what youre getting at why hes so passionate about this. Hes not objecting to this enforced religious conformity. From civil and religious leadership. On some sort of philosophical principle or constitutional grounds that we would operate out of. He has such a high view of the spiritual life. That if for it to be its best in a persons heart in life, it needs to be untouched by anything outside. Any sort of governmental authority, any sort of law which is forcing you to behave spiritually in one way or another. Is just going to dirty your religious faith. Okay. He holds it up so high, ta he thinks that that sort of interference with someones spirit is harming them. Okay . Does that make sense . Okay. Very good. You said god require not a uniformity of religion to be enacted or enforced by any religious state. Sooner or later is the greatest occasion of civil war, ravishing conscience. Persecution of christ and servant ands the hypocrisy and destruction of millions of souls. When government bodies get involved in religious faith from his perspective, people only get hurt. From his perspective millions of peoples. Throughout time. Ravishing their conscience. Making them do something they do not believe in. All right. This is an understanding of religious liberty that make sense to our minds. That we understand at this point in time. Okay . Thats not what the people in Massachusetts Bay colony thought. He was dangerous. Quite dangerous. He had one more thing. If the religious ideas werent bad enough, then he had one another idea that he put out there which just that was no. Too much. All right . It was this. The Massachusetts Bay colony that we got from the king . All right . And we brought over with us on the ships to Massachusetts Bay and we settled our town and built our homes and churches and businesses and farms. Started making little puritans over here. Right . That charter is not valid. Because the king did not own this land. If we really wanted to own this land we needed to get it from the people who did own it. Which was not the king. It was a native people who lived here. So he thought it was null and void. Which again goes to the heart of everything they were doing. But particularly legally and financially its okay you have now no title to your land because the charter under which the title to your farm was granted to you is not valid therefore your owner ship of the land is not valid. Go home. Where ever that is. So he was spiritually troubling. Religious religiously troubling. Legally troubling. They did not take kindly to his words. The General Court of massachusetts decided in 1635 he had been in salem as minister for two years. Lasted two years. That he would be placed either voluntarily or involuntarily on the next ship from boston back to england in 1636. As soon as it set out to go, it was safe to travel, he was going. What turns out he did have one friend in a high place. Because he didnt wait until that ship to take him back to england. In 1636. Somebody said roger, heres whats up. Theyre going to put you on the ship and fwet you out of here. He said okay, bye. In 1635 he fled to the Massachusetts Bay colony and went south. Burr purchased some property from the native people. Around providence, rhode island. 1644, he gets a charter a Royal Charter from the crown. For his new colony. And establishes what we know as rhode island. It was the first colony to grant true religious freedom as we would understand it. You can believe whatever your conscience leads you to believe. And because of that it became a haven for dissinters. By ann hutchen son. Well talk about ann and mary. Here presently. Now by creating a haven for di sinters. By granting everybody true religious freedom doesnt necessarily mean he believed all of them were true. He thought you should be free to believe whatever you wish. But try to convince someone else of the truth ofever religion. Rather than forcing them into the practice of your particular religion. He was passionately devote td to his own believe and would try to convince you of their truth. But not threaten to throw you in jail if you dissented from his religious belief. Major threat, very very early. Okay . To the entire puritan experiment. And he chose the option of leaving. Before he was forced to leave. Any questions . His story clear . All right. Very briefly. Lets talk about a woman by the name of ann hutchenson. Okay. Ann came to the Massachusetts Bay colony in early 1630s. This is roger going south ward. Joined later by followers. Lots of them. Mary is kind of the bridge between Roger Williams and mary. We need to talk about mary. Another remarkable individual. She also began to state some rather unorthodox religious believes. Very soon after her arrival. After listening to the ministers there in Massachusetts Bay, she decided a couple different things. One, that they were preaching a gospel of works. Meaning you are going to earn gods favor by what you do. By engaging in a certain set of behaviors. In her case she describes such things as civil obedience. Public loyalty oaths. You had to profess your loyalty to the crown, to the colony and so on. Instead of a gospel of grace, free grace. Meaning that the love and forgiveness of salvation of of god is open to available to all. Regardless. Theres nothing you can do to earn it. Its a gift. From their perspective. She had this idea, and she didnt keep it to herself. Dh which as we talked about on monday was a problem when women spoke things out loud that they should not be speaking out loud according to to the time. All right . And one of the things she did is spoke it out loud in meetings at her house. People recognized that she had a certain spiritual authority. And women and children would gather to her house weekly. And hear her teach. Thats okay. Because remember in hierarchy, women you were fine teaching other women. And the children in the household servants. Even if your ideas are a little wonky. Dont get too wonky and keep it there. Very soon she was accused of and put on trial for having, remember the word. Promise cuous gathering in her house. You probably have a different view of what they meant back then. All this meant was that in her house there were both men and women. While shes teaching. Horrible, right . How could show do that. She was fine at one point teaching religiously until that first man stepped across the threshold of her house. At which point she was claiming a religious authority that was not hers. Which from what we said on monday, she would have been guilty of what . Disorderly speech. Thats correct. Saying something that was not yours to say. Or saying something foul about judge so and so. It wasnt appropriate. So yes, disorderly speech is what she would have been doing. Having promise cue yous gathering at her house. She was tried for it civilly and religiously. A two prong thing well see in salem as well. In civil court she was tried for disturbing the peace, social disruption. In the church she was tried for blasphemy and convicted on both counts. And banished from the colony. 1638. She went south to rhode island. Where she lived the rest of her life. Until she was killed nd indian raid. Some years later. Unfortunate end. One of the followers who went with her when she left the Massachusetts Bay colony in 1638 was a woman by the name of mary dire. Now taking a step back. One more thing about ann. If you have the opportunity to read about her, do so. Particularly if you read about her trial. And the way she stood up and defended herself. She was brilliant. She was confident, her word were powerful. She was an amazing person. So take the opportunity if you have it sometime it read about her and read her words. Her defense of herself and her right to believe. As she saw fit is very powerful. Remarkable person. So anyways back to the story. One of her followers that went south with her to rhode island was a woman by the name of mary direr. We think we know approximately when mary was born. We know exactly when she died. Down to a couple minutes. Okay . And youll find out why. All right. She was born as i said somewhere around 1611. And 1635 or so she married her husband. William. With him she immigrated to the Massachusetts Bay colony. She became a follower as i said of ann hutchenson. When she moved to rhod