I

THE APOSTLE OF SOUL-LIBERTY

That body-killing, soul-killing, state-killing doctrine of not permitting but persecuting all other consciences and ways of worship but his own in the civil state.... Whole nations and generations of men have been forced (though unregenerate and unrepentant) to pretend and assume the name of Jesus Christ, which only belongs, according to the institution of the Lord Jesus, to truly regenerate and repentant souls. Secondly, that all others dissenting from them, whether Jews or Gentiles, their countrymen especially (for strangers have a liberty), have not been permitted civil habitation in this world with them, but have been distressed and persecuted by them.—Roger Williams’ Estimate of Religious Persecution.The principle of religious liberty did not assert itself, save in one instance, at once that American colonization was begun. For the most part, the founders of these colonies came to this country imbued with the ideas concerning the relations between government and religion, which had been universal in Europe.... This makes the attitude of our American exception, Roger Williams, the more striking and significant. More than one hundred years in advance of his time, he denied the entire theory and practice of the past.—Sanford Cobb.Roger Williams advocated the complete separation of Church and State, at a time when there was no historical example of such separation.—Newman.

The principle of religious liberty did not assert itself, save in one instance, at once that American colonization was begun. For the most part, the founders of these colonies came to this country imbued with the ideas concerning the relations between government and religion, which had been universal in Europe.... This makes the attitude of our American exception, Roger Williams, the more striking and significant. More than one hundred years in advance of his time, he denied the entire theory and practice of the past.—Sanford Cobb.

Roger Williams advocated the complete separation of Church and State, at a time when there was no historical example of such separation.—Newman.

A GOVERNMENT of the people, formed by the people for the people, with Church and State completely separate, and with political privileges not dependent on religious belief, was organized and maintained successfully for the first time in Christendom in Rhode Island, the smallest of the American Colonies. Its inspiration and founder was Roger Williams, the apostle of soul-liberty. Because he was the first asserter of the principle which has since been recognized as the distinctive character of our national greatness, he has been called “The First American.”

Little is known of the personal appearance of Roger Williams. His contemporaries describe him as a man of “no ordinary parts,” with “a never-failing sweetness of temper and unquestioned piety.” They also said he was a man of “unyielding tenacity of purpose, a man who could grasp a principle in all its bearings and who could incorporate it in a social compact.” “He was no crude, unlearned agitator, but a scholar and thinker.” Governor Bradford speaks of him as “having many precious parts.” Governor Winthrop refers to him as “a godly minister.”

The artist’s conception, based upon these characteristics, is best expressed by a monument in Roger Williams Park, Providence, R. I. It is the work of Franklin Simmons, and was erected by the city of Providence in 1877. In a beautiful park of over four hundred acres with hills and drives and lakes, surrounded by trees and shrubbery, and on land originally purchased from the Indians by Williams, the illustrious pioneer of a new order is seen in heroic form. He seems to be looking out over the very colony he formed. In his hand he holds a volume, entitled “Soul-Liberty, 1636,” a title which has since become synonymous with his name. History is seen writing “1636,” the birth year of soul-liberty in America. She continues to write with increasing appreciation of the far-reaching influence of this illustrious hero of religious and political democracy.

Copy of Shorthand Found on Fly-leaf of Roger Williams’ Indian Bible

For many years scholars thought that Roger Williams was born at the close of the sixteenth century at Gwinear, Cornwall, England. Now it is generally believed that he was born in London, England, in the opening years of the seventeenth century. He had two brothers and a sister. His father was a tailor. About this time Timothy Bright and Peter Bales introduced into England a new method of writing which was called “shorthand.” The boy Roger Williams learned it and visited the famous Star Chamber to put it into practice. The judge noticed the lad and inspected his work. To his amazement, the record was complete and accurate. This judge, Sir Edward Coke, the most distinguished lawyer and jurist of his day, immediately took an interest in the lad, and became his patron, securing for Williams admission to the Charterhouse School. This was the school where John Wesley, Thackeray, Addison, and others were educated. He was admitted as a pensioner, in June, 1621. Later, through Coke’s influence, he was admitted to Pembroke College, Cambridge, in June, 1623. He was graduated with the degree of bachelor of arts in 1627, and the year following was admitted to holy orders. About this time he was disappointed in a love affair, the lady of his choice being Jane Whalley. He sought permission of her aunt, Lady Barrington, to marry her. Whenrefused, he wrote a striking letter in which he predicted for Lady Barrington a very unhappy hereafter unless she repented.

Sir Edward CokeCourtesy of “Providence Magazine”

In 1629, we find him at High Laves, Essex, not far from Chelmesford, where Thomas Hooker, later the founder of Hartford Colony, was minister. Here he also met John Cotton. Men’s views at that time were changing. The people of the Established Church were divided into three classes. One stood by the Established Order in all things; another class of Puritans sought to stay by the Church, but aimed to purify the movement; the third class was for absolute separation. Williams, with hundreds of others, was disturbed. The anger of Lady Barrington and the suspicions of Archbishop Laud started a persecution which drove him out of England. He said:

I was persecuted in and out of my father’s house. Truly it was as bitter as death to me when Bishop Laud pursued me out of the land, and my conscience was persuaded against the national church, and ceremonies and bishops.... I say, it was as bitter as death to me when I rode Windsor way to take ship at Bristol.

Many years later he wrote:

He (God) knows what gains and preferments I have refused in universities, city, country, and court in old England, and something in New England, to keep my soul undefiled in this point and not to act with a doubting conscience.

Before leaving England, he was married. The only information we have in regard to his wife, up to that time, is that her name was Mary Warned. They sailed on the ship Lyon, from Bristol, England, December 1, 1630. After a tempestuous journey of sixty-six days they arrived off Nantasket, February 5, 1631. Judge Durfee speaks thus of this flight:

He was obliged to fly or dissemble his convictions, and for him, as for all noblest natures, a life of transparent truthfulness was alone an instinct and a necessity. This absolute sincerity is the key to his character, as it was always the mainspring of his conduct. It was this which led him to reject indignantly the compromises with his conscience which from time to time were proposed to him. It was this which impelled him when he discovered a truth to proclaim it, when he detected an error to expose it, when he saw an evil, to try and remedy it, and when he could do a good, even to his enemies, to do it.

Upon his arrival in Boston he was invited to become the teacher in the Boston church, succeeding Mr. Wilson who was about to return to England. To his surprise, he discovered that the Boston church was a churchunseparated fromthe Established Church of England, and he felt conscientiously bound to decline their invitation. The Boston people, who believed their church to be the “most glorious on earth,” were astonished at his refusal. Williams would not act as their teacher unless they publicly repented of their relation to the Established Order. It was perfectly natural that a soul with convictions, such as Williams possessed, should desire to be absolutely separated from the Established Order. One incident from many will show the spirit of the Established Church in England toward those within its ranks who had become Puritan, let alone Separatist. Neal, in his “History of the Puritans,” tells, of Doctor Leighton’s persecution in England. He was arrested by Archbishop Laud and the following sentence was passed upon him: That he be

committed to the prison of the Fleet for life, and pay a fine of ten thousand pounds; that the High Commission should degrade him from his ministry, and that he should be brought to the pillory at Westminster, while the court was sitting and be publicly whipped; after whipping be set upon the pillory a convenient time, and have one of his ears cut off, one side of his nose split, and be branded in the face with a double S. S. for a sower of sedition: that then he should be carried back to prison, and after a few days be pilloryed a second time in Cheapside, and have the other side of his nose split, and his other ear cut off and then be shut up in close prison for the rest of his life.

In the district in which Roger Williams lived this sentence was carried out in all its hellish cruelty just prior to Williams’ banishment from England. Do we blame the exile Williams for repudiating the movement which at that hour was so wicked in its persecutions? He meant to have a sea between him and a thing so hateful. John Cotton said that Williams looked upon himself as one who “had received a clearer illumination and apprehension of the state of Christ’s kingdom, and of the purity of church communion, than all Christendom besides.” Cotton Mather said that Williams had “a windmill in his head.” Well for America that such a windmill was there and that he was a prophet with clear visions of truth.

Charterhouse SchoolCourtesy of “Providence Magazine”

After refusing the Boston church, Roger Williams was invited by the Salem church to be assistant to Mr. Skelton, their aged teacher. He accepted their invitation and became Teacher, April 12, 1631. The General Court in Boston remonstrated with the Salem church. The persecution of this court led doubtless to his retirement from Salem at the close of that summer.

He left the Massachusetts Bay Colony and became assistant to Ralph Smith, the pastor at Plymouth. The Plymouth people, being strict Separatists, were more congenial company, since they had withdrawn from the Established Order to form a church after the pattern of the Primitive Church model. Williams remained in Plymouth for about two years. Governor Bradford soon detected his advanced positions, relative to separation of Church and State, but considered it “questionable judgment.” He praised his qualities as a minister, writing thus of him:

His teaching, well approved, for þe benefit whereof I still bless God, and am thankful to him, even for his sharpest admonitions and reproofs, so far as they agreed with truth.

Governor Winthrop, with Mr. Wilson, teacher of the Boston church, visited Plymouth at this time.

They were very kindly treated and feasted every day at several houses. On the Lord’s Day, there was a sacrament which they did partake in; and, in the afternoon, Mr. Roger Williams (according to their custom) propounded a question, to which the Pastor, Mr. Smith, spoke briefly; then Mr. Williams prophesied; and after the Governor of Plymouth spoke to the question. Then the elder (Mr. William Brewster) desired the Governor of Massachusetts and Mr. Wilson to speak to it, which they did. When this was ended, the deacon, Mr. Fuller, put the congregation in mind of their duty of contribution; whereupon the Governor and all the rest went down to the deacon’s seat, and put into the box and then returned.

Williams came in contact with the Indians who visited Plymouth from time to time, and gained the confidence of Massasoit, the father of the famous Philip. He studied their language and cultivated their friendship. He writes in one of his letters, “My soul’s desire was to do the natives good!” Near the close of his life he referred to this early experience: “God was pleased to give me a painful patient spirit, to lodge with themin their filthy smoke, to gain their tongue.” Surely the Providence of God was thus preparing the way for the founding of a new colony, to be made possible through these very Indians who had implicit confidence in this man of God.

AKeyinto theLANGUAGEOFAMERICA:OR,An help to theLanguageof theNativesin that part ofAmerica, calledNEW-ENGLAND.Together, with briefeObservationsof the Customes,Manners and Worships,&c.of theaforesaidNatives, in Peace and Warre,in Life and Death.On all which are added SpirituallObservations,Generall and Particular by theAuthour, ofchiefe and speciall use (upon all occasions,) toall theEnglishInhabiting those parts;yet pleasant and profitable tothe view of all men:BYROGER WILLIAMSofProvidenceinNew-England.LONDON,Printed byGregory Dexter, 1643.

Boston, 1632From an old print

The Fort and Chapel on the Hill Where Roger Williams PreachedUsed by permission of A. S. Burbank, Plymouth, Mass.

Williams was Pauline in his self-supporting ministry. He wrote: “At Plymouth I spake on the Lord’s Day and week days and worked hard at my hoe for my bread (and so afterward at Salem until I found them to be an unseparated people).” His ministry made friends and foes. His foes feared he would run the same course of Anabaptist behavior as did John Smith, the Se-Baptist, at Amsterdam. Early in August his first child was born, and was named Mary after her mother. Later in the same month, he became for a second time the assistant to Mr. Skelton, at Salem. A number of choice spirits, who had been attracted to his ministry, went with him. He requested a letter of dismission from the Plymouth church to unite with the Salem church. This was granted, but with a caution as to his advanced views. To advocate the separation of Church and State placed a man at that time with the “Anabaptists,” as this was considered their great distinctive doctrine.

He commenced his labors at Salem under this cloud and also with the General Court in Boston very suspicious of his work. Already there was the distant rumbling of a storm which would eventually drive him into exile.

The ministers of the Bay Colony, from the churches of Boston, Newtowne (Cambridge), Watertown, Roxbury, Dorchester, Salem, and elsewhere, were accustomed to meet for discussion and common interest. Roger Williams feared that this might lead to a presbytery or superintendency, to the prejudice of local church liberty. He loathed everything which might make for intolerance.

In December, 1633, he forwarded to the governor and his assistants a document which he had prepared at Plymouth, in which he disputed their right to have the land by the king’s grant. Williams claimed, “they have no title except they compounded with the natives.” He also accused King James of telling a lie in claiming to be “the first Christian prince to discover this new land.” This treatise had never been published or made public. Its appearance now terrified the governor and the assistants,for at that very time they were holding the possession to their colony on a charter originally given for a different purpose. It had been granted in England to a trading company, and its transfer was questionable. They feared the king might withdraw it. This treatise of Williams would be considered treason by the king. They met on December twenty-seventh and counseled with Williams. Seeing the grave danger to the colony, he agreed to give evidence of loyalty. Today we do not question the ethical correctness of the advanced position held by Williams.

It was not long before this pioneer of soul-liberty raised a new question concerning “the propriety of administering an oath, which is an act of worship, to either the unwilling or the unregenerate.” Williams’ position was peculiarly obnoxious to the magistrates who were then on the point of testing the loyalty of the colonists by administering an oath of allegiance which was to be, in reality, allegiance to the colony instead of to the king. The Court was called to discuss the new objection to its policy. Mr. Cotton informs us that the position was so well defended by Williams that “it threatened the court with serious embarrassment.” The people supported Williams’ position, and the court was compelled to desist. On the death of Skelton, in August, 1634, the Salem church installed Roger Williams as their teacher. This act gave great offense to the General Court in Boston. Williams commenced anew his agitation against the right to own land by the king’s patent. The Salem church and Williams were both cited to appear before the General Court, July 18, 1635, to answer complaints made against them.

The elders gave their opinion:

He who would obstinately maintain such opinions (whereby a church might run into heresy, apostasy, or tyranny, and yet the civil Magistrates may not intermeddle) ought to be removed, and that the other churches ought to request the Magistrates so to do.

The church and the pastor were notified “to consider the matter until the next General Court, and then to recant, or expect the court to take some final action.” At this same court, the Salem people petitioned for a title to some land at Marblehead Neck, which was theirs, as they believed, by a just claim. The court refused even to consider this claim, “until there shall be timeto test more fully the quality of your allegiance to the power which you desire should be interposed on your behalf.” Professor Knowles says:

Here is a candid avowal that justice was refused to Salem, on the question of civil right, as a punishment for the conduct of church and pastor. A volume could not more forcibly illustrate the danger of a connection between the civil and ecclesiastical power.

Pembroke CollegeReduced from Loggan’s print, taken about 1688

Teacher and people at Salem were indignant, and a letter was addressed to the churches of the colony in protest against such injustice. The churches were asked to admonish the magistrates and deputies within their membership. These churches refused or neglected to do this. In some cases the letters never came before the church. Williams then called on his own church to withdraw communion with such churches. It declined to do this, and he withdrew from the Salem church, preaching his last sermon, August 19, 1635. Here was a repetition of the first conflict. Straus writes:

Here stood the one church already condemned, with sentence suspended over it. Against it were arrayed the aggregate power of the colony—its nine churches, the priests, and the magistrates. What could the Salem church and community do, threatened with disfranchisement, its deputies excluded from the General Court, and its petition for land to which it was entitled, denied? Dragooned into submission it had to abandon its persecuted minister to struggle alone against the united power of Church and State. To deny Williams the merit of devotion to a principle in this contest, wherein there was no alternative but retraction or banishment, is to belie history in order to justify bigotry, and to convert martyrdom into wrong-headed obstinacy. This is exactly what Cotton sought to do in his version of the controversy given ten years later in order to vindicate himself and his church brethren from the stigma of their acts in the eyes of a more enlightened public opinion in England. Williams pursued no half-hearted or half-way measures. He stood unshaken upon the firm ground of his convictions, and declared to the Salem church that he could no longer commune with them, thereby entirely separating himself from them and them from him.

He went so far as to refuse to commune with his own wife in the new communion which he formed in his own home, until she would completely withdraw from the Salem church.

The time for the next General Court drew near. The Salem church letter and Williams’ withdrawal from his church madehis foes determined to crush him. They had thoughts of putting him to death.

1635.3rd Sept.Whereas Mr. Roger Williams, one of the elders of the church of Salem, hath broached and divulged dyvers newe and dangerous opinions against the aucthorite of magistrates, as also with others of defamcon, both of the magistrates and churches here, and that before any conviccon, and yet maintaineth the same without retraccon, it is therefore ordered, that the said Mr. Williams shall depte out of this jurisdiccon within sixe weekes nowe nexte ensueing, wch if hee neglect to pforme, it shall be lawfull for the Gouv’r and two of the magistrates to send him to some place out of this jurisdiccon, not to returne any more without licence from the Court.

1635.3rd Sept.

Whereas Mr. Roger Williams, one of the elders of the church of Salem, hath broached and divulged dyvers newe and dangerous opinions against the aucthorite of magistrates, as also with others of defamcon, both of the magistrates and churches here, and that before any conviccon, and yet maintaineth the same without retraccon, it is therefore ordered, that the said Mr. Williams shall depte out of this jurisdiccon within sixe weekes nowe nexte ensueing, wch if hee neglect to pforme, it shall be lawfull for the Gouv’r and two of the magistrates to send him to some place out of this jurisdiccon, not to returne any more without licence from the Court.

Fac-simile from Original Records of the Order for the Banishmentof Roger Williams.

The General Court convened in the rude meeting-house of the church in Newtowne (Cambridge), on the corner of Dunster and Mill Streets. Williams maintained his positions. He was asked if he desired a month to reflect and then come and argue the matter before them. He declined, choosing “to dispute presently.” Thomas Hooker, minister at Newtowne, was appointed to argue with him on the spot, to make him see his errors. Williams’ positions had a “rockie strength” and he was ready, “not only to be bound and banished, but to die also in New England; as for the most holy truths of God in Christ Jesus.” He would not recant. So the Court met the following day, Friday, October 9, 1635, and passed the following sentence:

Whereas Mr. Roger Williams, one of the elders of the church of Salem, hath broached and divulged dyvers newe and dangerous opinions against the aucthorite of magistrates, as also with letters of defamcon, both of the magistrates and churches here, and that before any conviccon, and yet maintaineth the same without retraccon,it is therefore ordered, that the said Mr. Williams shall depte out of this jurisdiccon within sixe weekes nowe nexte ensueing, wch if hee neglect to pforme, it shall be lawfull for the Gouv’r and two of the magistrates to send him to some place out of this jurisdiccon, not to returne any more without licence from the Court.

Original Church at Salem, Mass.

Site of Home of Roger Williams in Providence, R. I.

Although Williams had withdrawn from the church at Salem, yet his character was such that the town was indignant at this decree of the court. About this time, his second child was born. Like the prophets of old, he gave the child a significant name, calling her “Freeborn.” Mr. Williams’ health at this time was far from being robust. A stay of sentence was therefore granted, and he was to be allowed to remain until the following spring. He did not refrain from advocating his opinions, and soon the authorities heard of meetings in his house at Salem and of twenty who were prepared to go with him to found a new colony at the head of the Narragansett Bay. At its January meeting, the Court decided to send him to England at once in a ship then about to return. He was cited to appear in Boston, but reported inability due to his impaired health. They then sent a pinnace for him by sea. Being forewarned, he fled to the wilderness in the depths of which, for fourteen weeks, he suffered the hardships of a New England winter.

******

The original Roger Williams Church is still preserved at Salem. The first church in the first town of the Massachusetts Bay Colony was at the corner of Washington and Essex Streets. There is a brick structure there now and a marble tablet marks it as the site of the first church in the Massachusetts Bay Colony. On another tablet, is the inscription:

The frame of the first Meeting House in which the civil affairs of the Colony were transacted, is preserved and now stands in the rear of Plummer Hall.

Plummer Hall is on Essex Street not very far from the First Church. In the rear is the Roger Williams Church, a small building, measuring twenty feet long by seventeen wide by twelve high at its posts. Originally it had a gallery over the door at the entrance and a minister’s seat in the opposite corner. On thewall opposite to the entrance is a list of its succession of pastors and the years of their service:

It could accommodate about one hundred people. There were only forty families in Salem in 1632. There were only six houses, besides that of Governor Endicott, when Higginson arrived in 1629. Here in this ancient meeting-house Roger Williams preached those truths which led to his banishment. From its pulpit came, clearly stated, the ideals that millions have since accepted. The glory of the Sistine Chapel in Rome, or the Royal Sancte Chapella, of Paris, can never equal the glory of this crude edifice, the cradle of religious liberty in the New World.

The Roger Williams Home at Salem is still preserved. It is better known as “the Witch House” because it was occupied by Judge Carwin, one of the judges connected with the tragedy of 1692. It stands at the western corner of Essex and North Streets. It was built by the founder of Rhode Island and was at that time second only to the Governor’s home. Though it has been altered and repaired, the original rooms in this building are as follows: The eastern room on the first floor, 18 × 21½, and the room directly over it, 20 × 21½; the western room on the first floor, 16½ × 18, and the room over it, 16½ × 20. The chimney is 8 × 12. The part of the house which retains its original appearance is the projecting corner of the western part, fronting on Essex Street. Roger Williams mortgaged this house, “for supplies,” to establish the colony at Providence.

Mr. Upham, in his report to the Essex Institution, says of this wonderful house:

Here, within these very walls, lived, two hundred and fifty years ago, that remarkable and truly heroic man, who, in his devotion to the principle of free conscience, and liberty of belief, untrammeled by civil power, penetrated in midwinter in the depths of an unknown wilderness to seek a new home, a home which he could find only among savages, whoserespect for the benevolence and truthfulness of his character made them, then and ever afterward, his constant friends. From this spacious and pleasant mansion, he fled through the deep snows of a New England forest, leaving his wife and young children to the care of Providence, whose silent “voice” through the conscience, was his only support and guide. The State which he founded may ever look back with a just pride upon the history of Roger Williams.

Back to Index Next