Talk:Mary Dyer

Untitled
There are several problems with this statement: "Dyer joined with Hutchinson and became involved in what was called the "Antinomian heresy," [4] where they worked to organize groups of women and men to study the Bible in contravention of the theocratic law of the Massachusetts Bay Colony."

a) As it stands, the phrasing makes it sound as if there were a concerted "movement" called the "A. Heresy" that was being "organized." This is quite misleading and misinformed. "Antinomian" is among the labels applied to heterodox individuals whose claim that grace, not law, was to be emphasized in the conduct of a Christian life (as Paul does indeed claim, particularly but not only in Romans) went too far (in some opinions) in the direction of what today might be called libertarianism.

In other words, grace might well be salvific but attention to colonial civil order was not simply optional. This confusion appears to have arisen for Hutchinson because of the two very different contexts in which her minister, John Cotton (whom she had followed from England) found himself preaching. In old England, worshipping according to the dictates of one's heart was at the time a form of voluntary civil disobedience, and an ethical place was made for it for those who might be arrested, jailed for sedition against the Crown's (Anglican) church, etc. In New England, people of Separatist/Puritan/Congregational/Dissenting persuasion were not under that aegis, and instead needed to obey the laws so that chaos would not erupt in the new settlement. Her trial in particular clarifies some of these issues; if the present article is going to refer to that, perhaps a cross-link ought to be made.

b) I don't recall seeing anything about men being included in the womens' groups Hutchinson was leading in her home. These were usually of (usually older) women for (generally, but not always, younger) women, under the rubrics in Timothy which allows an older woman to provide spiritual guidance to those less experienced than she (and the implications have to do with the dynamics related to her role as a submitted spouse to a male, probably intimacies related to childbearing, etc.)

c) I know of no records indicating that M.B. Dyer actually "joined" with A. M. Hutchinson to do anything of the sort. They were definitely known to each other, of course, but belonging to two different religious groups as they did (Hutchinson was a member of First Church (1629/30) while Dyer was a participant in the nascent Friends' movement in Boston (which as yet had no standing and no building--the first brick Friends' house for meeting was built in Brattle Square in 1708), so it's unlikely that the two would be campaigning door-to-door together to get adherents, or anything of the sort (which is what the modern term "organizing" suggests here, in fact.)

The implication has always been that Hutchinson's groups gathered in her home, drawn by word-of-mouth, so of course anything is possible, but the distinctions between religious groups in Boston was more sharply chiseled than that; without more documentation I'd find it hard to believe in any "organized" meetings--so far as they're described, they were more conversational in tone.

d) The phrase "theocratic law of MBC" is pretty general, and the perhaps too-high-faluting word "contravention" suggests that it opposed Bible study at all. What was considered a problem was people reading Scriptures and interpreting them without adequate scholarly preparation by which to understand certain points that appear over a range of citations in both the Hebrew and Christian testaments, and may have had different meanings in the original languages, or a history of interpretation from the periods of Jewish as well as Christian scholarship (which were not unknown at all, at the time...at least three Cambridge/Boston ministers knew Hebrew well enough to "English" all 150 Psalms for the 1640 Bay Psalm Booke, and by the late 17th/early 18th c., Judah Monis was teaching Hebrew to ministerial students like Nathaniel Mather, who at age 14 gave his graduation recitation from Harvard in Hebrew.)

In fact, the desire was essentially to prevent people from just doing anything and saying "The Scriptures made me do it," [which wouldn't be a bad thing in some situations yet today (my opinion, I know...I'm thinking of recently found kidnapping victims...)] Dellaroux (talk) 20:39, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Information about Mary Dyer prior to her marriage to William Dyer is virtually unknown as is information about her activites in England after 1651 and before her return to Boston in 1657, other than that she became a follower of Fox. I would like to discuss with others any efforts being made to learn more about Mary Dyer's family and activities in England. Tiphys 03:43, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Apparent copyright violation
Material seems to have been copied to this article from http://www.rootsweb.com/~nwa/dyer.html by User:Tiphys on 28 January 2007. A warning notice has been placed on that user's talk page. The relevant edits will be reverted unless consent is confirmed. - Fayenatic london (talk) 21:02, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Article needs an upgrade
There is a useful article in Oxford Dictionary of National Biography by Catie Gill, ‘Dyer, Mary (d. 1660)’, giving several reliable-looking references, including American National Biography.

However ODNB makes no mention of the two references given under the heading "Publications" in the WP article. Are they reliable? Usually in WP articles, the heading "Publications" refers to publications by the subject of the article. As Mary Dyer is a notable person in American and Quaker history, an upgrade would be most beneficial,especially if fuller references were provided. It would be good tohave an illustration of the Boston sculpture of Mary Dyer, rather than the 19th C print, showing her in an improbably submissive posture. === Vernon White (talk)  00:22, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

"Freeman's oath" needs explanation
The fourth sentence carries the phrase "Freeman's oath" which needs to be explained. There will be many people like me who do not know what it means. 222.153.78.18 (talk) 00:52, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Linked to Freeman_%28Colonial%29. Hope that's OK.  Vernon White  . . . Talk 01:02, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Nice one. It needed that. 222.153.78.18 (talk) 05:42, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Rainbow club avengers
Apparently this article was vandalized a year ago.

Revision as of 14:45, 26 March 2009 (edit) Philly jawn (talk | contribs) (→Life)

Dyer joined with Hutchinson and became involved in the Rainbow club avengers's "Antinomian heresy," [4]

I'm undoing it in good faith. Yopienso (talk) 04:59, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

"American" vs "United States"
The categories involving the word "American" have been questioned, with "appropriate labels? tags." I've removed these tags, based on the general sense that the word American refers to America, both before and after the American Revolutionary War. While the word American may not have been as much in vogue before the war, it still validly applies to the American colonies.Sarnold17 (talk) 18:42, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

Improper sourcing
National Ancestral Council, thanks for working on this article. The recent additions you've made are improperly sourced. If you say so, I believe you that the info you've added is in the books to which you refer. However, you need to cite in MLA or Harvard style and give page numbers. Yopienso (talk) 06:20, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Descent claim removed
I removed "Kris Williams from Ghost Hunters/Ghost Hunters International on the Syfy Channel".The sentence had been marked "Citation needed" in March. The WP article on this person makes no mention of the claimed descent. Vernon White '''. . . Talk''' 06:56, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

William Dyer
We assume that he was her husband, and that "they" applies to the couple. There seems to be some confusion as to Old Staye and New Style dating.--Wetman (talk) 00:01, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

Death date?
Her date of death in the first sentence is given as June 1. However, the body of the article states that she was convicted and sentenced to death on June 1, then hanged the next day. Since I don't have access to the sources, this article's still listed as C class, and Dyer's quite important to American spiritual history, I'm noting this rather than make the change myself.Jweaver28 (talk) 08:23, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

Execution Grounds
I thought this happened at the execution grounds on the Boston Common. If that is in question, what is the alternate proposed location? If it wasn't on the Common, a lot of plaques in Boston need to be changed. - Co rb ie V  ☊ 22:11, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Location of the Boston gallows
Johan Wisner has carried on extensive research on Mary Dyer over the past two decades, and has published several articles and currently has a blog. In his blog, citing credible evidence, he states that the gallows where Mary Dyer was hanged was not located on the Boston Common, but rather at a location on Boston Neck. This information can be found here at the end of the second paragraph, with a source cited. Even if the evidence is not conclusive, there is enough doubt that I think it's best to avoid giving an exact location for the hanging. I'm trying to advance this article, and I don't care to go into an explanation of the exact location of the gallows.Sarnold17 (talk) 22:14, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Blogs are not WP:RS. It takes more than one new theory to change this when everyone else disagrees. If you want to note it as a minority theory, do so, but don't just delete that information. - Co rb ie V  ☊ 17:38, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm really not trying to be offensive. The guy is not just a blog writer; he is a published author on the subject, and two of his published articles are sourced in the Mary Dyer article.  He is ready to publish a book on Mary Dyer, and is currently seeking a publisher.  But, regardless of his credentials, he has given a source that discusses the issue.  I have not yet tracked down this source, but that is a future option.  My point is this:  there is serious doubt as to the location of the Boston gallows.  Because of this doubt, it is better to leave the location out of the article, rather than continue promoting what may be a myth.  All I'm saying is that because the issue is in doubt, it is best left out of the article.  It is an extremely minor point that does not need to become a point of contention.  It does not affect the overall tenor of the article in the least.Sarnold17 (talk) 21:18, 30 October 2014 (UTC)


 * A link that talks about the gallows being on Boston Neck is here Sarnold17 (talk) 21:33, 30 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Most blogs are crap. However, most people who condemn a source because "it is just a blog" overlook that a small fraction of the online material that calls itself a blog, or that others characterize as "just a blog", are actually fine, authoritative, reliable material.  Scotusblog is a good example.  Journalists who write about the law routinely quote Scotusblog.  Since those journalists are, themselves, WP:Reliable sources, then any source that they cite, that they quote, that they respect, should be considered an  RS -- even if it includes the word "blog" in its title. , I urge you to be careful not to discount fine, authoritative, reliable material, simply because someone said it is a "blog".  Geo Swan (talk) 20:15, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

Birth name
We need a RS for Marie. YoPienso (talk) 12:20, 14 December 2015 (UTC)


 * The RS is Winsser's 2004 article in the New England Historical Genealogical Register, which cites both English documents that give her name as Marie Barret. The name Marie is specifically discussed within this wikipedia article.Sarnold17 (talk) 12:42, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Sorry I hadn't noticed. YoPienso (talk) 04:40, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

Johan Wissner
A significant amount of this article is based upon Wissner's research as a "family researcher". Does anyone know if his qualifications are sufficient to be used as a reliable source? That man from Nantucket (talk) 07:32, 6 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Don't let the words "family researcher" fool you. The guy is a published author, and two of his published works, one in 1990 and the other in 2004, are cited in the references for this article.  My impression is that he is the foremost authority on Mary Dyer, alive today.Sarnold17 (talk) 20:21, 6 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Hmmm. Question above seems to have overlooked the discussion of Wissner's qualifications at .  `  Geo Swan (talk) 20:05, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Mary Dyer. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130729090900/http://www.newportbristol.com/colony/FoundersBrook.html to http://www.newportbristol.com/colony/FoundersBrook.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 06:12, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Mary Dyer. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090727151131/http://www.womensenews.org/article.cfm/dyn/aid/1371/context/archive to http://www.womensenews.org/article.cfm/dyn/aid/1371/context/archive

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 18:38, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

Tone
While most of this article is well-written, parts of it seem to lapse into maudlin narrative: "The most outrageous accounting", etc. It is possible that this is the result of too-close paraphrasing of the source material, or perhaps the writer is more sympathetic to the subject than might be appropriate for an encyclopedia. --Piledhigheranddeeper (talk) 21:20, 1 June 2022 (UTC)