Thomas Maule-A Quaker With Balls
Written: Apr 23 '02 (Updated May 10 '02)
|
Product Rating:
|
|
|
Pros: An excellent account of an important trial, plus original source material.
Cons: Most readers won't want to read the whole thing.
The Bottom Line: The history of the trial is worth reading. The appendices (by Thomas Maule) are long and are not going to appeal to all modern readers.
|
|
|
| lilburne's Full Review: Better That 100 Witches Should Live: The 1696 Acqu... |
This is actually several books in one. It starts out with a discussion of the life of Thomas Maule, a Quaker merchant in Salem, Massachusetts in the late seventeenth and early eighteenth century. The discussion focuses on Maule’s 1696 trial for sedition on account of a book he wrote attacking the Puritan establishment of Massachusetts. This discussion is written by James Maule, a descendant of Maule’s who is a legal scholar. James Maule seems to have done this book in honor of his ancestor. James Maule's narrative focuses on the significance of Thomas Maule's case for the development of the First Amendment.
After James Maule's discussion of Thomas Maule’s life and his trial, there are several “appendices” which, in fact, make up most of the book. Each appendix is a work written by Thomas Maule, beginning with “Truth Held Forth and Maintained,” which is the book for which Maule was prosecuted. Then there is a narrative of Maule’s trial, written pseudonomyously by Maule himself. There is also a pamphlet by Maule criticizing Cotton Mather, and another pamphlet criticizing George Keith, a famous ex-Quaker of the day. Finally, there is an appendix by a modern scholar about references to Thomas Maule in Hawthorne's book about the seven gables.
For the general reader, I recommend that you skim the appendices and read the first part of the book, which is James Maule's history of Maule’s life and his 1696 trial. This historical section is truly fascinating. I would not recommend the appendices to everyone, since they are written in a style foreign to twenty-first century readers. If, however, you are willing to put up with the old-fashioned style and dig into the appendices, you are in for a real treat.
Maule’s writing style is very different from the modern Quaker style of speaking and writing. Based of a lifetime of experience observing the species, I can say that the modern Quaker is a very timid creature. He never says a harsh word, never raises his voice. He never denounces evildoers, because that would be judgmental. The only time a modern Quaker gets angry is if someone else starts acting in a “judgmental” way.
The non-judgmentalism of the modern Quaker has become so extreme that it often veers over the line into outright moral relativism. Having strong ideas of right and wrong is considered intolerant, so the modern Quaker generally avoids having those kinds of strong ideas. This is not the tolerance of Jesus, who saved the adulteress from her would-be executioners and told her to sin no more. A modern Quaker would never tell an adulteress to sin no more, because that would inhibit the expression of her sexuality. On the other hand, a modern Quaker would never stick his neck out to save the adulteress from stoning. After all, stoning people to death is simply a form of cultural expression, and it would be wrong to interfere with it or judge it.
The “tolerance” of modern-day Quakers is best exemplified, not by Jesus, but by Pontius Pilate. Pilate was the one who asked, what is truth? This question is fully in the spirit of modern Quakerism. To the Pontius Pilate school of Quakerism, there is no such thing as absolute truth. Truth is relative, and anyone who thinks he knows the truth is a dangerous fanatic who deserves what he gets.
I’m exaggerating, of course, but not by much. There are a whole lot of modern-day Quakers who come very close to the description I have given.
People who are used to modern Quakerism will be surprised to see, in Thomas Maule’s work, an entirely different sort of Quakerism. Maule’s Quakerism is in the prophetic spirit of Jeremiah and John the Baptist, a prophetic spirit that confronts the powers-that-be and tells them where to get off. Maule’s Quakerism is the kind of Quakerism that kicks hiney and takes names. And if thee has a problem with that, why doesn’t thee blow me?
Maule’s personal history was quite interesting. His father was an Englishman who fought for King Charles I during the English Civil War. Maule, Senior was enslaved by Oliver Cromwell, the victor in that Civil War. According to Maule family tradition, Thomas went to Barbados in search of his father, and found his father in Barbados, held in slavery. Whether this tradition is true or not, Maule did indeed go to Barbados. He then moved to Massachusetts. It was only after moving to Massachusetts that Maule became a Quaker.
The Quakers in Massachusetts were a minority of religious dissenters who were suspected by the Massachusetts authorities of heresy and worse. Within living memory, the Massachusetts government had hanged four Quaker missionaries. The laws had at one time imposed fines on those who harbored Quakers.
Even after this sort of blatant persecution had abated, Quakers were still forced to pay taxes for the support of the Puritans’ churches. Maule claims that a Salem magistrate told him (Maule) that, because he was a Quaker, the magistrate would not punish anyone who robbed, assaulted or even killed Maule. In other words, a government official told Maule that, because he was a Quaker, he was a de facto outlaw in his own community.
Despite this governmental attitude, Maule became a well-off merchant in Salem. He acquired a reputation among Quakers and non-Quakers for honest dealing. His non-Quaker neighbors were sufficiently impressed with him to entrust him with a couple of important public offices. As an official known as the Clerk of the Market, Maule went after bakers who short-weighted the poor. Maule went after the bakers so vigorously that they sued him, but Maule won. How many modern Quakers risk lawsuits because they’re overly aggressive about helping the poor?
At the same time that Maule was becoming a prominent member of the Salem community, he was working on the book which was later published as “Truth Held Forth and Maintained.” It seems that Maule worked on this book from 1689 through 1695, during his spare time. The book was to be a defense of Quaker religious doctrines and an attack on the Puritan establishment. The arguments of the book were probably an elaboration of “spontaneous” remarks that Maule made during the weekly meetings for worship which were held by Salem’s Quakers (in a Meetinghouse donated by Maule).
By 1692, Maule had the opportunity to show the public a sneak preview of some of the material in the book he was working on. Maule had received a notification from the local Militia Committee that he was expected to help out in military activities. Since, in those days, Quakers were pacifists, this demand conflicted with Maule’s conscience, so he wrote a letter to the militia committee explaining his position. The letter said that Maule was not disposed to fight for Massachusetts, which had persecuted his co-religionists and was under a divine judgment for the sins of its ruling classes.
Remember what the situation was like in 1692. Salem was the epicenter of witchcraft hysteria. People from Salem and the surrounding communities were being tried for witchcraft and sentenced to death on the testimony of teenage girls and other witnesses who claimed that the defendants were working diabolical magic in the community. Rank and respectability were no protection against being accused. Defendants who didn’t admit the charges against them were hanged.
Maule, with his usual tact and sensitivity, alluded to this situation when he wrote to the Militia Committee. Maule said that, assuming the witchcraft accusations were true, then that only proved the wickedness of the authorities, since the alleged witches were all members of the established church of Massachusetts. Maule said that the Puritan leaders were to blame for any witchcraft that might be found among members of the established church.
Maule was taking great risks in writing this letter at this time. The embers of anti-Quaker persecution still smoldered in Massachusetts. There was a risk that these embers might be fanned into a flame during the current hysteria. Massachusetts officials thought that their theocracy was divinely ordained. By saying that the Massachusetts government was evil and Godless, Maule was, from the point of view of the authorities, setting himself in opposition to God Himself. Surely Maule was just a little nervous that he might experience the fate which befell many other allegedly Godless people in the Salem of 1692.
Fortunately for Maule, the authorities had other fish (and witches) to fry, so they seem not to have paid attention to Maule’s letter to the Militia Committee. As far as I know, no Quakers in Salem were persecuted during the witchcraft uproar. In fact, Maule’s wife allegedly testified in one of the witch trials, but I couldn’t find out the details of this. The point about Maule’s letter to the Militia Committee is that Maule was very brave (or foolhardy) in choosing this particular time to denounce the Puritans. He might have gotten himself hanged as a witch.
Although the authorities left Maule alone when he wrote his letter to the Militia Committee in 1692, Maule was arrested three years later when he published the completed version of “Truth Held Forth.” No printer in Massachusetts would publish a work like Maule’s, so Maule hired a printer in the colony of New York named William Bradford to publish his opus.
“Truth Held Forth” was a defense of Quaker principles, which Maule said were the principles of true Christianity. No mealy-mouthed yammering about diverse perspectives. Maule denounced the religious doctrines of the Puritans as anti-Christian. Maule’s discussion was an exposition of what at the time was orthodox Quakerism, with emphasis placed on those doctrines which contradicted the views of the Puritan establishment.
For instance, Maule defended the Quaker position that, with Christ’s help, Christians could achieve a state of sinless perfection. The Puritans, by saying that Christians would remain in a sinful state even after they were saved, were teaching wicked doctrines. The Puritans, by persecuting the Quakers, had brought the wrath of God upon themselves. Their doctrines were evil, as shown, for example, by the fact that the local Indians were more virtuous before getting “converted” by the Puritans than afterward.
There is a lot of theological discussion along these lines. To the modern reader, the section of “Truth Held Forth” which has the greatest interest is the section on witchcraft. Maule uses the Salem witchcraft hysteria to reinforce his point about the wickedness of the Puritans. He repeats the argument of his Militia Committee letter that the alleged witches were all members of the Puritans’ own church. In addition to making this point, Maule adds several other arguments.
Maule says that it is wrong to execute people for witchcraft (except in cases of murder). Maule concedes that the Old Testament requires the death penalty for witches, but he points out that the law of the Old Testament has been superseded by Christ’s covenant of grace described in the New Testament. If you have a death penalty for witchcraft, says Maule, why not also have a death penalty for other crimes which the Old Testament makes punishable with death, such as fornication and disrespect for parents? Maule alleges that executing fornicators, people who sass their parents, etc., would depopulate the colony of Massachusetts. Thus, imposing the death penalty for witchcraft is clearly wrong.
Maule questions the reliability of the “confessions” of alleged witches who were faced with the choice of confessing or being hanged. He also questions the courts’ reliance on the teenage witnesses-they claimed to be servants of Satan, so how could their testimony possibly be reliable? The teenagers and other witnesses claimed to have witnessed supernatural occurrences, but this was “spectral evidence” which could be the product of delusion, and it was wrong for the courts to accept such inherently untrustworthy evidence.
In other words, Maule attacks the Puritan establishment for its conduct of the witch trials, and he questions the reliability of the evidence used against the “witches.” He also says that the Puritans are morally equivalent to witches, because, like witches, the Puritans are literally doing the Devil’s work.
Maule must have known that his work would be controversial. Controversy is to modern Quakers what a ham sandwich is to a pious Muslim: An unclean thing which must be shunned at all costs. To Maule and other early Quakers, however, controversy was seen as the inevitable consequence of preaching the truth of Christianity. I get the impression that Maule was one of those people who would feel acutely disappointed if he *didn’t* cause controversy. If so, Maule had no reason to feel disappointed.
Once “Truth Held Forth” hit the streets, the Massachusetts government initiated a prosecution against Maule. By 1695, the witchcraft hysteria had abated, and Maule was not charged with witchcraft. Instead, he was charged with seditious libel. When the governing council of Massachusetts examined him about “Truth Held Forth,” Maule said that his book was true, except for a couple of insignificant errors, the same kind of errors you could find in the Bible. When the council asked Maule to give an example of alleged errors in the Bible, Maule gave an example, earning himself an additional criminal charge for criticizing the Good Book.
Maule was held in prison until 1696, when he was brought to trial before a jury of Salemites. The prosecution claimed that “Truth Held Forth” was false, but failed to show any evidence of alleged falsity. Maule argued to the jury that “Truth Held Forth” was a religious work, and as such it ought to be judged by religious authorities, not by secular juries. Of course, this argument undermined the whole basis of the Puritan regime, since the Puritan governing class had always sought to invoke the secular courts to enforce religious conformity. If the Puritans could no longer rely on the courts to punish religious dissent, then the next step would be freedom of conscience, which was contrary to the core ideology of the Puritan theocracy.
Maule attacked the insufficiency of the prosecution’s evidence. Invoking his presumption of innocence, Maule said that the government had not linked him to the book. Maule’s name was on the title page, but that fact was legally meaningless, because anyone could put another person’s name on a title page. With the subtlety of a sledgehammer, Maule said that the prosecution was relying on “spectral evidence”-the same term which had been used to describe the evidence in the Salem witch trials. In other words, Maule was comparing his own prosecution with the prosecution of the “witches” in 1692. Many people in Salem, by this time, had come to see the witch trials as a tragic episode in the life of their community, and there was some resentment against the government for its behavior in those trials. Maule appealed to this latent resentment on the part of the jurors.
The jury gave a verdict of not guilty in Maule’s case. The judges started trying to browbeat the jurors, demanding the reasons for the verdict (which judges have no right to ask). The foreman, echoing Maule’s arguments, said that there was not enough evidence to link Maule to the book, and anyway, the book ought to have been judged by a jury of divines, not a lay jury. The judges were then forced to accept the verdict.
James Maule's account of Thomas Maule's trial describes Maule’s trial as a landmark in the development of the First Amendment. I would think that the trial was also a landmark in the struggle against Puritan tyranny in Massachusetts. The fact that a jury was willing to acquit an uncompromising critic of the regime indicates that the people of Massachusetts were beginning to resist the oppression of their would-be masters. Since this was a Salem jury, one can guess that, in the wake of the witch trials, perhaps the people of Salem were beginning to doubt the wisdom of having Puritan clerics have such dominance over the community. This is just a guess, but it’s not a wild guess.
After his 1696 acquittal, Maule published an account of his trial. He wrote pseudononymously, which is unusual for Quakers of that era, especially for Maule. Perhaps Maule wanted his name off the title page this time. In his account of the trial, Maule redoubles his attack on the Puritans. He also published an attack on the Puritan priest/theologian Cotton Mather, who had written a naive and credulous book which took the witch trials seriously.
Maule also wrote an attack on George Keith, a man who had once been a Quaker but who became an Anglican (after being prosecuted for sedition in Quaker-dominated Pennsylvania for criticizing the Quaker leadership of that province). Maule’s attack-dog style, which is so useful when he is going after the Puritans, doesn’t work as well against Keith, who was a sincere religious seeker who had the misfortune of holding opinions different from Maule’s own. Maule nonetheless treated Keith with the usual abuse, calling Keith an apostate and comparing him with the fallen angel Lucifer, etc. The Keith pamphlet is an example of the limitations of Maule’s approach. The three anti-Puritan pamphlets, however, are examples of how the attack-dog style can be very helpful against an opponent who deserves to be attacked, and the Puritans certainly deserved it.
Nowadays, everyone attacks the Puritans. It’s easy to attack them in 2002. But do you think the modern anti-Puritans would have had the courage to do what Maule did, and attack the Puritans at the height of their power? On their home ground? In Salem, Massachusetts? Maule deserves credit as one of the few people with the courage to tangle with the Puritans on their home turf. Maule’s incisive, hard-hitting attacks put to shame those modern “Christians” who try to hold up the Puritans as models of religious enlightenment. Please!
My recommendation is that the reader get this book in order to read the introductory account of Maule’s trial as well as the witchcraft section of “Truth Held Forth.” You can then decide if you want to read the other parts of the book.
Recommended:
Yes
|
|
|
|
Epinions.com ID:
lilburne
|
|
Member: Maximilian Longley
Location: Durham, NC, USA
Reviews written: 84
Trusted by: 7 members
|
|
|
- Add to My Yahoo!: 
- Add to Google Homepage: 
© 1999-2009 Shopping.com, Inc.