If the Quakers weren’t secessionists, what were they?

This is a very complicated question to ask, and it can be summed up as saying that if they are not secessionists, they simply are not secessionists. The real question here is whether or not being driven out from a group and community still allows the removed group to be considered secession.

It can be argued that the hand of the Quakers was forced, that the Puritans gave them no other choice than to escape. This can be backed up by looking at the value of Quakers, the fact that they were pacifists, and that they were not likely to lead an active revolt against the Puritans.

But why does a hand being forced still not make this a rebellious act? Instead of putting up with the terrors of the Puritans in the Massachusetts Bay Colony, the Quakers took an active step away from the horrors that they were being subjected to, and instead saved themselves from the horrible treatment they were subjected to.