VI

THE TORCH-BEARERS OF THE IDEALOF ROGER WILLIAMS UNTIL LIBERTYENLIGHTENED THE WORLD

I believe all our Baptist ministers in town, except two, and most of our brethren in the country were on the side of the Americans in the late dispute.... To this hour we believe that the independence of America will, for a while, secure the liberty of this country, but if that continent had been reduced, Britain would not have long been free.—Doctor Rippon, of London, England, to President Manning, of Rhode Island College, written in 1784.

Nor need any one dream that Jefferson and Madison could have carried this measure by their genius and influence. They were opposed by many men whose transcendent services, or unequalled oratory, or wealth, position, financial interests, or intense prejudices would have enabled them easily to resist their unsupported assaults. Like a couple of first-class engineers on a tender with a train attached, but no locomotive, would Jefferson and Madison have appeared without the Baptists. They furnished the locomotive for these skilled engineers which drew the train of religious liberty through every persecuting enactment in the penal code of Virginia.—Wm. Cathcart, D. D., in “The Baptists and the American Revolution.”

The Baptists were the first and only religious denomination that struck for independence from Great Britain, and the first and only one that made a move for religious liberty before independence was declared.... Of those who took part in the struggle for religious liberty, the Baptists were the only denomination that maintained a consistent record and held out without wavering until the end—until every vestige of the old establishment had been obliterated by the sale of the glebes.—Dr. Charles James, in “Documentary History of the Struggle for Religious Liberty in Virginia.”

WE have seen the early struggles of Roger Williams. We have seen the halo of glory which clusters about the State he founded. We have seen his place in the plans of a Divine providence. We have also seen his place in the procession of heroes who held aloft the torch of religious and soul-liberty throughout the ages. When by death, he was compelled to drop that torch, others took it up and continued the procession until the first amendment to our National Constitution became a fact of history. The Baptists led the historic movement in all the colonies which stood for this principle of “Religious Liberty.” Oscar S. Straus says:

The Baptists ... had a much more enlightened and advanced view: they held that Christianity should propagate itself by its own spiritual force; that the civil government was entirely apart and distinct and should have no control over conscience, or power to inflict punishment for spiritual censures.

Professor Gervinus, professor at Heidelberg, Germany, about the year 1850, published a work, in which he referred to Williams and his ideal:

Roger Williams urged an entire liberty of conscience in Massachusetts. He was obliged to fly from the country, and in 1636 he founded a small new society in Rhode Island upon the principles of entire liberty of conscience. It was prophesied that the democratic attempts to obtain a general elective franchise and entire religious liberty would be of short duration. But these institutions have spread from that petty state over the whole union. They superseded the aristocratic commencements of Carolina and New York, the High-church part of Virginia, the theocracy in Massachusetts, and the monarchy throughout America; they have given laws to one quarter of the globe; and, dreaded for their moral influence, they stand in the background of every democratic struggle in Europe.

For the publication of such sentiments, Professor Gervinus was tried at Mannheim and sentenced to four months’ imprisonment and to have his books publicly burned.

Back of political progress there must be spiritual strength. Back of the final victory of religious liberty in America there was not only the glorious example of Rhode Island as a political demonstration but the persistent propagation of the ideals in all the States. This was chiefly the task of the Baptists, many of whose churches could trace their origin to settlers from Rhode Island.

During the Colonial period, the laws of Massachusetts and Virginia relating to soul-liberty were most severe; those in Maryland and Pennsylvania, the most lenient, outside of Rhode Island.

Order banishing the Founders of the First Baptist Church in Boston.

1644. Nov. 13.Whereas Thomas Gold (and others) obstinate and turbulent Annabaptists, have some time since combined themselves wh others in a pretended church estate xxxxx to the great griefe and offence of the godly orthodox xxxxxxxx and about two years since were enjoyned by this Court to desist from said practise and to returne to our allowed Church Assemblies, xxxxxx this Court doe judge it necessary that they be removed to some other part of this country or elsewhere: and accordingly doeth order that (they) doe before the twentieth of July next remove themselves out of this jurisdiccon.

1644. Nov. 13.

Whereas Thomas Gold (and others) obstinate and turbulent Annabaptists, have some time since combined themselves wh others in a pretended church estate xxxxx to the great griefe and offence of the godly orthodox xxxxxxxx and about two years since were enjoyned by this Court to desist from said practise and to returne to our allowed Church Assemblies, xxxxxx this Court doe judge it necessary that they be removed to some other part of this country or elsewhere: and accordingly doeth order that (they) doe before the twentieth of July next remove themselves out of this jurisdiccon.

In Massachusetts the Baptist sentiment did not die out with the banishment of Roger Williams. In 1640, Rev. Mr. Chauncey advocated the immersion of believers and also of infants. Later President Dunster, of Cambridge College, went further and denounced the whole system of infant baptism. About the same time, Lady Moody, of Lynn, denied infant baptism. In 1644, a poor man by the name of Painter, reaching the same conclusion, refused to have his child baptized. The court interfered and the man was tied up and whipped. On November 13, 1644, two months after Williams arrived in Boston, en route to Providence, with the charter, the Massachusetts Bay Colony passed a law against the Baptists, in which they were described as “The incendiaries of commonwealths, the troublers of churches.” They ordered that all who “openly condemn or oppose the baptizing of infants shall be sentenced to banishment.” The General Court issued an order in 1644 banishing the founders of the Boston Baptist Church. In 1651, Obadiah Holmes, John Clarke, and John Crandall came to Lynn, Massachusetts, from Newport, Rhode Island. They were holding a service in Mr. Witter’s house, about two miles out from Lynn. Mr. Clarke was preaching from Revelation 3:10. The service was broken up by the arrival of two constables, who, with clamorous tongues, interrupted the discourse and arrested the preachers. The prisoners were held in Lynn until the morning, when they were taken to the Boston prison. Two weeks later, they were sentenced topay heavy fines. The fines of Clarke and Crandall were paid by friends. Holmes refused any assistance in paying his fine of thirty pounds and was publicly whipped with thirty lashes from a three-corded whip. Thirteen others, who sympathized with these brethren, were arrested and were ordered to pay a fine of forty shillings each or take ten lashes. John Hazel, an old man from Rehoboth, was whipped and died a few days afterward. Clarke published the story of this incident in “Ill Newes from New-England”—an original copy is in the John Carter Brown Library, Providence, R. I. Cotton was the religious leader in Boston, back of this persecution. In 1680 the doors of the Baptist meeting-house in Boston were nailed up by the authorities. Finally the Baptists in Boston won some freedom, which, however, was denied to other Baptist churches throughout the State. Isaac Backus was the leader among the Massachusetts Baptists for soul-liberty. With President Manning, he appealed to the Massachusetts delegates at the Continental Congress to provide in the Constitution for separation of Church and State. John Adams replied to them: “They might as well turn the heavenly bodies out of their annual and diurnal courses as to expect they would give up their establishment.” This spirit of opposition was continued until 1833, in which year the last vestige of oppressive religious intolerance was removed from the statute-books of Massachusetts.

ILLNEWESFROMNEW-ENGLANDORA Narative ofNew-EnglandsPERSECUTION.Wherein is declaredThat while oldEnglandis becoming new,New-Englandis become Old.Also four Proposals to the Honoured Parliament and Councel of State,touching the way toPropagate the Gospel of Christ(with smallcharge and great safety) both in OldEnglandand New.Also four conclusions touching the faith and order of the Gospel ofChrist out of his last Will and Testament, confirmed and justifiedByJohn ClarkPhysician of Rode Island inAmerica.Revel.2. 25.Hold fast till I come.3. 11.Behold I come quickly.22. 20.Amen, even so come Lord Jesus.LONDON,Printed byHenry Hillsliving inFleet-Yardnext door to theRoseandCrown, in the year 1652.

In Virginia, the opposition to the Baptist movement was bitter and unrelenting. The early settlers of Virginia left England, when their church, the Established Church of England, had won a complete victory over all other persuasions. The Virginians sought to duplicate in the new land the spirit of the victors across the sea and make religion uniform in their colony. Laws were passed against popish recusants as early as 1643. Other laws were passed by their assembly between the years 1659 and 1663 against those who failed to have their children baptized. The Quakers especially found these laws most severe. The early Baptists of Virginia were of the common people; their ministers were illiterate; and for a while they escaped notice. The first imprisonment of Baptists was in the county of Spottsylvania, Va., June 4, 1768. Three Baptists, John Waller, Lewis Craig, and James Childs, with others, were arrested for disturbing thepeace. (There was no law against preaching.) The opposing lawyer in the court-room made this charge:

May it please your worships, these men are great disturbers of the peace; they cannot meet a man on the road, but they ram a text of Scripture down his throat.

Mr. Waller so defended himself and his brethren that their enemies were somewhat puzzled to know how to proceed against them. They offered to release them on promise to refrain from preaching in the county for a year and a day. The defendants refused the offer and were sent to prison. Other Baptist ministers were arrested, and soon thirty were under arrest. The prisons became Baptist pulpits, and multitudes gathered around them to hear the preachers. Their opponents engaged drummers to drown the preaching; high enclosures were in some cases erected before prison windows, and suffocating materials were burned near the prisons. Baptists from the beginning were unremitting in their struggle to secure religious liberty. They secured the support of Patrick Henry, a member of the Established Church, but a firm friend of all who stood for liberty, civil and religious. He helped the Baptists to win the complete victory.

The Baptist cause was destined to have a more congenial atmosphere in Pennsylvania when we remember that William Penn, its illustrious founder, had an English Baptist father and a Dutch mother, undoubtedly of Anabaptist descent. He received his charter in 1681, forty-five years after Roger Williams’ banishment from Massachusetts. Penn possessed broad and liberal ideas and was opposed to any church establishment. He provided

that all persons who confess and acknowledge the Almighty and Eternal God to be the Creator, Upholder, and Ruler of the world, ... should in no ways be molested, nor compelled to frequent or maintain any religious worship.

Yet only those confessing faith in Jesus Christ could become freemen in Penn’s domain. The separate Quakers in the colony of Pennsylvania were arrested, fined, and imprisoned for dissent.

John Clarke MemorialFirst Baptist Church of Newport, R. I.

Grave of John Clarke

The first company of Baptists in this colony came from Rhode Island. William Dugan came there in 1684, three years after Penn received his charter. He settled at Cold Spring, in Bucks County. The first church in Philadelphia was founded by John Holmes in 1686. The first meeting-place was at the corner of Second and Chestnut Streets.

Two Thirds of the Members have the Power of a full House. No Member to vote &c. in the House till qualified. The Qualification of every Member of Assembly. Altered by an Act pass’d in the II Geo. I, entitled An Act—prescribing the Forms of Declaration of Fidelity. &c.AND if any County or Part of this Province shall refuse or neglect to choose their respective Representatives as aforesaid, or if chosen, do not meet to serve in Assembly, those who are so chosen and met shall have the full Power of an Assembly in as ample Manner as if all the Representatives had been chosen and met; Provided, they are not less than two Thirds of the Whole that ought to meet.AND BE IT FURTHER ENACTED by the Authority aforesaid, That no Person who shall be hereafter a Member of the Assembly, or House of Representatives of this Province, shall be capable to vote in the said House, or sit there during any Debate, after their Speaker is chosen, until he shall make and subscribe the following Declarations and Profession his Belief,viz.,IA. B.do sincerely promise, and solemnly declare before GOD and the World, That I will be faithful and bear true Allegiance to QueenAnne.And I do solemnly profess and declare. That I do, from my Heart, abbor, detest and renounce as impious and heretical, that damnable Doctrine and Position, That Princes excommunicated or deprived by the Pope, or any Authority of the See ofRome,may be deposed or murdered by their Subjects, or any other whatsoever.AND I do declare, That no foreign Prince, Person, Prelate, State or Potentate hath, or ought to have, any Power, Jurisdiction, Superiority, Preeminence or Authority ecclesiastical or spiritual, within the Realm ofEngland,or the Dominions thereunto belonging.AND IA. B.do solemnly and sincerely, in the Presence ofGOD,profess, testify and declare, That I do believe that in the Sacrament of theLORD’sSupper there is not any Transubstantiation of the Elements of Bread and Wine into the Body and Blood ofCHRIST,at or after the Consecration thereof, by any Person whatsoever; and that the Invocation or Adoration of the VirginMary,or any other Saint, and the Sacrifice of theMass,as they are now used in the Church ofRome,are superstitions and Idolatrous.AND I do solemnly, in the Presence ofGOD,profess, testify and declare. That I do make this Declaration and every Part thereof, in the plain and ordinary Sense of the Words read unto me, as they are commonly understood byEnglish Protestants,without any Evasion, Equivocation or mental Reservation whatsoever and without any Dispensation already granted me for this Purpose by the Pope, or any other Authority or Person whatsoever, or without any Hope of any such Dispensation from any Person or Authority whatsoever, or without thinking I am or may be acquitted beforeGOD,or Man, or absolved of this Declaration, or any Part thereof, although the Pope, or any other Person or Persons, or Power whatsoever, should dispense with or annull the same, or declare that it was null or void from the Beginning.AND IA. B.profess Faith inGODthe Father, and inJESUS CHRIST,his eternal Son, the trueGOD,and in theHOLY SPIRIT,oneGOD,blessed for evermore; and do acknowledge theHoly Scripturesof theOldandNew-Testament,to be given by divine Inspiration.

AND if any County or Part of this Province shall refuse or neglect to choose their respective Representatives as aforesaid, or if chosen, do not meet to serve in Assembly, those who are so chosen and met shall have the full Power of an Assembly in as ample Manner as if all the Representatives had been chosen and met; Provided, they are not less than two Thirds of the Whole that ought to meet.

AND BE IT FURTHER ENACTED by the Authority aforesaid, That no Person who shall be hereafter a Member of the Assembly, or House of Representatives of this Province, shall be capable to vote in the said House, or sit there during any Debate, after their Speaker is chosen, until he shall make and subscribe the following Declarations and Profession his Belief,viz.,

IA. B.do sincerely promise, and solemnly declare before GOD and the World, That I will be faithful and bear true Allegiance to QueenAnne.And I do solemnly profess and declare. That I do, from my Heart, abbor, detest and renounce as impious and heretical, that damnable Doctrine and Position, That Princes excommunicated or deprived by the Pope, or any Authority of the See ofRome,may be deposed or murdered by their Subjects, or any other whatsoever.

AND I do declare, That no foreign Prince, Person, Prelate, State or Potentate hath, or ought to have, any Power, Jurisdiction, Superiority, Preeminence or Authority ecclesiastical or spiritual, within the Realm ofEngland,or the Dominions thereunto belonging.

AND IA. B.do solemnly and sincerely, in the Presence ofGOD,profess, testify and declare, That I do believe that in the Sacrament of theLORD’sSupper there is not any Transubstantiation of the Elements of Bread and Wine into the Body and Blood ofCHRIST,at or after the Consecration thereof, by any Person whatsoever; and that the Invocation or Adoration of the VirginMary,or any other Saint, and the Sacrifice of theMass,as they are now used in the Church ofRome,are superstitions and Idolatrous.

AND I do solemnly, in the Presence ofGOD,profess, testify and declare. That I do make this Declaration and every Part thereof, in the plain and ordinary Sense of the Words read unto me, as they are commonly understood byEnglish Protestants,without any Evasion, Equivocation or mental Reservation whatsoever and without any Dispensation already granted me for this Purpose by the Pope, or any other Authority or Person whatsoever, or without any Hope of any such Dispensation from any Person or Authority whatsoever, or without thinking I am or may be acquitted beforeGOD,or Man, or absolved of this Declaration, or any Part thereof, although the Pope, or any other Person or Persons, or Power whatsoever, should dispense with or annull the same, or declare that it was null or void from the Beginning.

AND IA. B.profess Faith inGODthe Father, and inJESUS CHRIST,his eternal Son, the trueGOD,and in theHOLY SPIRIT,oneGOD,blessed for evermore; and do acknowledge theHoly Scripturesof theOldandNew-Testament,to be given by divine Inspiration.

The Law in William Penn’s Colony.No Absolute Soul-liberty in Pennsylvania in Those Days.

Lord Baltimore, the Roman Catholic proprietor of Maryland, was far in advance of his Church. He came to the New World to secure religious liberty for himself and his friends. The Maryland Act of Toleration, issued in 1649, provided that

Blasphemy against God, and a denial of the Trinity should be punished with death and confiscation of lands and goods, and blasphemy against the Virgin Mary should first be punished by a fine of five pounds, and if persisted in, by a forfeiture of all possessions and banishment from the colony.

1649.Acts and Orders of ASSEMBLY, assented to, enacted and made, at a General Session of the said Assembly, begun and held atSt. Mary’s on the 2d Day ofApril1649, and ended the 21st Day of the same Month.William Stone, Esq; Governor.CHAP. I.Passed 21st ofApril1649.An Act concerning Religion. Lib.CandWH.fol.106.Lib.WH.fol.111.and Lib.WHandL.fol.1.Confirmed among the perpetual Laws 1676,ch.2.N. B.By this Law, (1.) Blasphemy against GOD, denying our Saviour JESUS CHRIST to be the Son of GOD, or denying the Holy TRINITY, or the Godhead of any of the Three Persons,&c.was to be Punished with Death, and Confiscation of Lands and Goods to the Lord Proprietary. (2.) Persons using any reproachful Words or Speeches concerning the Blessed VirginMary, Mother of our Saviour, or the Holy Apostles or Evangelists, or any of them, for the 1st Offence to forfeit 5l.Sterling to the Lord Proprietary; or, in default of Payment, to be publicly Whipped, and Imprisoned at the Pleasure of his Lordship, or his Lieut. General. For the 2d Offence to forfeit 10l.Sterling, or in default of Payment to be publicly and severely Whipped, and Imprisoned as before directed. And for the 3d Offence to forfeit Lands and Goods, and be for ever Banished out of the Province. (3.) Persons reproaching any other within the Province by the Name or Denomination of Heretic, Schismatic, Idolater, Puritan, Independent, Presbyterian, Popish Priest, Jesuit, Jesuited Papist, Lutheran, Calvinist, Anabaptist, Brownist, Antinomian, Barrowist, Round-Head, Separatist, or any other Name or Term in a reproach-

1649.

Acts and Orders of ASSEMBLY, assented to, enacted and made, at a General Session of the said Assembly, begun and held atSt. Mary’s on the 2d Day ofApril1649, and ended the 21st Day of the same Month.

William Stone, Esq; Governor.

CHAP. I.

Passed 21st ofApril1649.

An Act concerning Religion. Lib.CandWH.fol.106.Lib.WH.fol.111.and Lib.WHandL.fol.1.

Confirmed among the perpetual Laws 1676,ch.2.

N. B.By this Law, (1.) Blasphemy against GOD, denying our Saviour JESUS CHRIST to be the Son of GOD, or denying the Holy TRINITY, or the Godhead of any of the Three Persons,&c.was to be Punished with Death, and Confiscation of Lands and Goods to the Lord Proprietary. (2.) Persons using any reproachful Words or Speeches concerning the Blessed VirginMary, Mother of our Saviour, or the Holy Apostles or Evangelists, or any of them, for the 1st Offence to forfeit 5l.Sterling to the Lord Proprietary; or, in default of Payment, to be publicly Whipped, and Imprisoned at the Pleasure of his Lordship, or his Lieut. General. For the 2d Offence to forfeit 10l.Sterling, or in default of Payment to be publicly and severely Whipped, and Imprisoned as before directed. And for the 3d Offence to forfeit Lands and Goods, and be for ever Banished out of the Province. (3.) Persons reproaching any other within the Province by the Name or Denomination of Heretic, Schismatic, Idolater, Puritan, Independent, Presbyterian, Popish Priest, Jesuit, Jesuited Papist, Lutheran, Calvinist, Anabaptist, Brownist, Antinomian, Barrowist, Round-Head, Separatist, or any other Name or Term in a reproach-

The Law Concerning Religious Toleration in Maryland Colony.It is not Religious Liberty.

The Baptist church at Chestnut Ridge was formed in 1742 by Henry Sator, a layman of the General Baptist order, who had recently come from England. He invited Baptist ministers to preach in his house. They soon gathered a congregation; proselytes were gained, and a church organized. This church appealed to the governor and was taken under the protection of the toleration laws.

94.Capitall Laws.1.Dut. 13. 6, 10.Dut. 17. 2, 6Ex. 22. 20.P. 14.S. 1.If any man after legall conviction shall have or worship any other god, but the lord god, he shall be put to death.2.Ex. 22. 18.Lev. 20. 27.Dut. 18. 10.S. 2.If any man or woeman be a witch, (that is hath or consulteth with a familiar spirit,) They shall be put to death.3.Lev. 24. 15, 16.S. 3.If any man shall Blaspheme the name of god, the father, Sonne or Holie ghost, with direct, expresse, presumptuous or high handed blasphemie, or shall curse god in the like manner, he shall be put to death.

94.Capitall Laws.

Dut. 13. 6, 10.Dut. 17. 2, 6Ex. 22. 20.

P. 14.S. 1.

If any man after legall conviction shall have or worship any other god, but the lord god, he shall be put to death.

Ex. 22. 18.Lev. 20. 27.Dut. 18. 10.

S. 2.

If any man or woeman be a witch, (that is hath or consulteth with a familiar spirit,) They shall be put to death.

Lev. 24. 15, 16.

S. 3.

If any man shall Blaspheme the name of god, the father, Sonne or Holie ghost, with direct, expresse, presumptuous or high handed blasphemie, or shall curse god in the like manner, he shall be put to death.

Puritan-Religious-Liberty!Facsimile of original laws. From “Body of Liberties.” First legal code for the government of the Bay Colony. Drawn up by Rev. Nathaniel Ward, Lawyer-divine of Ipswich.

The Final Victory in the Long Struggle

Two Baptist organizations in close sympathy with each other contributed much toward the final victory. They made appeals to their immediate constituency and also to the larger following of all Baptists and other lovers of religious liberty. These were the Warren Association in New England, and the General Committeein Virginia. Each had a committee of grievances. The Baptists were nobly assisted by Presbyterians and Quakers in the final stages of the great conflict. Isaac Backus wrote his immortal work on “A History of New England, with Especial Reference to the Baptists.” He drafted appeals for the Association and for the committee on grievances to the General Assembly, published addresses on religious liberty, and inserted advertisements in leading papers. He believed that partial history and false statements regarding Baptist history and doctrines should be removed by scattering impartial and true knowledge. He was a Baptist giant and had his share in forming sentiment, which eventually made religious intoleration impossible in America.

Isaac Backus, with President Manning, of Brown University, then Rhode Island College, went to Philadelphia and with Quakers and others appealed to John Adams and other Massachusetts delegates in Carpenter Hall, Philadelphia. These advocates of soul-liberty took the position that to pay taxes to support a church clergy in which they did not believe was as much a wrong as to pay taxes for a government in which they had no representation. It was not the paltry tax of fourpence a man that the colonists in Massachusetts rebelled against. It was the principle that was back of paying the pence which they opposed. They were greatly amazed when John Adams told them that their own colony, Massachusetts, had “the most mild and equitable establishment of religion that was known in the world.”

William RogersJames ManningIsaac BackusThese men were all connected with the opening of the first Baptist college in America. James Manning was the first president; Isaac Backus, a member of the original board of trustees; William Rogers, the first student.

William RogersJames ManningIsaac Backus

These men were all connected with the opening of the first Baptist college in America. James Manning was the first president; Isaac Backus, a member of the original board of trustees; William Rogers, the first student.

The Virginia Baptists, through their General Convention, organized in 1784, united the efforts of the Baptists there and in New England for the final phases of the war against religious tyranny. For four years they had worked for liberty in their State laws and had won a complete victory. Then, in 1788, they turned to the national issue. The Federal Constitution had provided in Article VI, “No religious Test shall ever be required as a qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.” This did not satisfy the Baptists, because religious tests might be imposed for other purposes than those specified. In a noble letter, drafted by John Leland, a Baptist minister, they appealed to Washington. They paid a high compliment tohis achievements and then stated their grievance, closing with these words:

If religious liberty is rather insecure in the Constitution the administration will certainly prevent all oppression, for aWashingtonwill preside. Should the horrid evils that have been so pestiferous in Asia and Europe, faction, ambition, war, perfidy, fraud, and persecution for conscience sake, ever approach the borders of our happy nation, may the name and administration of our beloved President, like the radiant source of day, scatter all the dark clouds from the American hemisphere.

Washington replied that his ideals were the same, assuring them of this, in the following words:

No one would be more zealous than myself to establish effectual barriers against the horrors of spiritual tyranny and every species of religious persecution.

He complimented the Baptists and said that they

have been, throughout America, uniformly and almost unanimously, the firm friends to civil liberty, and the persevering promoters of our glorious revolution.

His assurance was not empty words. In a short time James Madison, with the President’s approval, submitted certain amendments. Article VI was superseded by the First Amendment to the Constitution, which specified:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Thus the long fight was won in America, and now people generally appreciate the importance of the victory gained. Rhode Island may have hesitated to accept the imperfect Constitution, with its lack of assurance for complete religious liberty. In this connection we should not forget that Massachusetts and Connecticut were the last to ratify the First Amendment.

Back to Index Next