because taxes got higher and they helped one another to afford the peoples salery. they all needed to work together to pay the checks and everything for the government
Only men who were members of the Puritan church could participate in the government
There is no official partnership between the US government and any church. The US government has never been in control of a church, and no church has ever been in control of the government.
No she was banished for holding meetings in her house that the Church did not approve of because she was teaching against the religious government from Massachusetts
because of the separation between the church and the state laid out in the constitution
First Baptist Church in Newton - Massachusetts - was created in 1780.
The unifying force in the Byzantine empire was the church . In the church the priests were the hiqhest class & this was also true in their society. The peasants were their worshippers. The church was a way to get the lower class to follow the government by connecting it to the leader . Social classes in church apply to the government .
The Fundamental Orders of 1638-1639, established in Connecticut, differed from the Massachusetts Bay Colony's governing framework primarily in their emphasis on a more democratic structure and broader suffrage. While Massachusetts had a more theocratic approach, prioritizing church membership for voting rights, the Fundamental Orders allowed non-church members to participate in governance. Additionally, the Orders outlined a written constitution that explicitly defined the powers of government, whereas Massachusetts relied more on unwritten traditions and colonial charters. This made Connecticut's system more progressive for its time, promoting a greater separation between church and state.
The church is guided by the Holy Spirit as the truth to impose the law of the church while the government is so secular and accepting opinions to make it as the truth when the legislators made the law.
Thomas Hooker disagreed with the Massachusetts government primarily over issues of church governance and the extent of suffrage. He believed that the government should be based on the consent of the governed and that all male property owners, regardless of church membership, should have the right to vote. This belief led him to lead a group of dissenters to establish a new settlement in Connecticut, where he helped draft the Fundamental Orders of 1638, which reflected his vision of a more democratic government.
there is no separation between church and state
There is no relationship. Unlike it was many years ago, the church no longer controls the government. ~ Sorry, just to clarify - the OP is correct that there is no official partnership between the US government and any church, but it is wrong to say that the church used to control the government. That has never been true in the US.
The Pilgrims wanted freedom from religious persecution. The Church of England was the state church and all other religions were banned. Most of the Pilgrims were Anabaptists or reformers of the church. This is why the "Separation of church and state" is part of our laws, the government did not want freedom from the church, but the church needed freedom from the government.