Customer Reviews

Roger Williams: The Church and the State

5 star:		(1)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

The book is both an overview of religious developments among the English in the 16th and 17th century and an examination of the extremist thought of Roger Williams, a Separatist-Puritan who came to the Massachusetts Bay colony in 1631. Religion in England had transitioned from Roman Catholicism to the Protestant Church of England to the Puritans by the end of the 16th century. The Separatist-Puritans were unwilling to compromise with elements of the Church of England and were forced to emigrate either to Holland or the New World. Key concerns were the inclusion of both believers and lesser believers and the administration of sacraments to all, as well as a priestly hierarchy.

Williams, in his insistence on enforcing a purist interpretation of Separatist-Puritan principles, incurred the disfavor of all varieties of Puritans in New England and as a consequence was forced to relocate several times before being banned from Massachusetts Bay. He ended up in Rhode Island as a relatively young man, but the author gives no indication of how his life proceeded from that point on.

Williams questioned the legitimacy of self-selected, so-called elected, individuals to form churches and elect ministers. In addition, he disagreed that a civil government formed by a people ruled by divine right. What was the process whereby God extended authorization and legitimacy, he asked. His views undercut the Massachusetts General Court, which took on the responsibility of enforcing religious standards in the colony along with the ministers. According to Williams, a civil government was only about protecting the bodies and property of subjects. While fundamental morality was also of concern to governments in so far as immorality affected community peace, enforcing religion interfered with liberty of conscience concerning religion. In other words, religion could not be coerced. It was these fundamental views as well as his criticisms of practices within churches that exasperated authorities sufficiently to exclude him from the colony.

The author gives high marks to Williams as an uncompromising thinker. But with Williams there seems to be a fine line between intellectual integrity and self-indulgent nit-picking. As a religious man, where was he going with his view that no true churches existed or his idea that ministers could not preach to the unconverted? On the other hand, his ideas of separation of church and state were remarkable for the times. The author perhaps should have paid more attention to the practicalities of Williams' unfettered thinking. In this era of inclusion and acceptance, Puritan exclusiveness and rigidities are hard to grasp. This book helps.

Williams is shown as uncompromising in the pursuit of the correct way to live. Even when it was unpopular (even dangerous) Willams said what he felt was the truth -- and lived up to his own standards. He is too often overlooked and too important not to teach our children about.