THE EXPERIMENTAL COLONY:
ROGER WILLIAMS’ IDEAS ON RELIGIOUS LIBERTY AND CIVIL ORDER
By Leah Catania ’14
Once European nations began exploring the Atlantic and settling in the Americas,
colonies sprung forth for various reasons. The majority were organized and funded by
companies to gather resources in the New World, though the small number of colonies
settled in order to flee religious persecution are the best known. However, only one
colony was billed as an experiment: Rhode Island. Born of religious dissenters, thrown
into immediate political tension, and labeled as the “banished” colony, Rhode Island
certainly had a unique founding. As an integral part of the colony’s birth, Roger Williams
worked tirelessly to ensure that the colony remained separated from the rest in its ideals.
In addition to advocating for religious liberty, Roger Williams also emphasized the
importance of civil order as a result of Rhode Island’s contentious political start.
Despite the fact that many of the Puritans fled to America to escape religious
persecution in England, they were no more tolerant than their own persecutors once they
established their colonies. They sought to create a shining example of a truly pious,
Calvin society. In Governor John Winthrop’s words, Massachusetts Bay “shall be as a
city upon a hill.” 1 In order to achieve this goal, everyone in the colony had to abide by
the same conditions, led by the ministers of the Puritan faith. Most Puritans, especially
those in Massachusetts Bay colony, believed that every individual and the community as
1
John Winthrop, “Christian Charity, A Model Hereof,” in Puritans in the New World, A Critical
Anthology, ed. David D. Hall (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2004), p. 169.
a whole entered into a sacred covenant with God. This covenant meant that the sinful
actions of one person could spell disaster for everyone. Natural disasters such as fires and
crop failures were viewed as direct punishments from God for sinful behavior.2 Generally
speaking, if even one person attempted to think or act in a slightly different direction,
they were quickly punished and set back on the right path, for fear that the entire
community would suffer for their impiety.3 John Winthrop stated, “we must be knitted
together in this work as one man. . . we must uphold a familiar commerce together in all
meekness, gentleness, and liberality,” or they would crumble under God’s wrath and the
devil’s influence. 4 The theocracy established in Massachusetts Bay colony and elsewhere
left no room for the preaching of personal interpretations of the Bible, despite the
Protestant ideal that every person be capable of reading the Bible themselves.
Roger Williams, on the other hand, believed that every man had the right to
liberty of conscience. In England, Williams witnessed the persecution of countless
religious sects. In response, he published A Bloudy Tenet of Persecution, in which he
claimed that “it is the will and command of God, that. . . a permission of the most
Paganish, Jewish, Turkish, or Antichristian consciences and worships, bee granted to all
men in all Nations and Countries: and they are only to be fought against. . . with the
Word of God.”5 Williams was a devout Christian and passionate minister. His preaching
was one of the reasons Massachusetts Bay so vehemently insisted on banishing him.
However, the “Word of God” was the only weapon he would ever use on those with
beliefs that differed from his. He thought one could not be a true Christian if one was
2
Juliet Haines Mofford, “The Devil Made Me Do It!” (Gilford, CT: Globe Pequot Press, 2012), p. 19.
Ibid, p. 1.
4
Winthrop, “Christian Charity,” p. 169.
5
Roger Williams, A Bloudy Tenet of Persecution for Cause of Conscience (London, 1644), p. 2, EEBO.
PDF. Accessed 4/11/13.
3
forced to be faithful by the ruling body. A person could only truly be faithful if they came
to Christianity by fully understanding all the beliefs.
When founding Rhode Island colony, Williams firmly believed that it was
possible for a community to function based on religious liberty. However, the early
history of Rhode Island was fraught with political discord. Unlike in Massachusetts Bay,
where the theocracy was firmly established, Williams’ attitude toward religious freedom
and Rhode Island’s reputation for harboring refugees of all kinds, not simply religious
dissenters, attracted some very “strong individualists, men who had little love of
government and who tended to resist its claims when they conflicted with their own selfinterest.”6 These men often caused problems for Williams and the colony as a whole. One
extreme case of pro-anarchy was Sam Gorton. He not only managed to “resist local law
enforcement,” but also inspired others to as well. The conflict resulted in “a bloody battle
between ‘Gortonites’ and Providence agents.” 7 The citizens of Providence were so
concerned with his behavior that they actually appealed to Massachusetts Bay for help.
While they received no assistance, their appeal showed how much the “experience of
severe social discord and disunity had deepened their solicitousness for civil order.” 8
Despite the conceptions religious conformists in Massachusetts Bay held of them, Rhode
Islanders sincerely wished to keep civil order in their colony.
Another large contention in early Rhode Island politics was the divisiveness
present between the four original settlements of Providence, Newport, Portsmouth and
Warwick. Originally, these towns were only bound by “social compacts” that were
6
Theodore Dwight Bozeman, “Religious Liberty and the Problem of Order in Early Rhode Island,” The
New England Quarterly 45, no. 1 (March 1972), p. 49. JSTOR. Accessed 4/17/13.
7
Ibid, p. 50.
8
Ibid, p. 51.
“merely of communal fiat and agreement,” which caused “chronic instability, and often
schism” between the communities.9 This schism came to a head with the actions of
William Coddington. When his place in the Newport government was no longer enough
for him, he took it upon himself to procure a separate charter to “reconstitute Aquidneck
Island as a separate political entity with himself as governor.”10 Somehow, he managed to
succeed, even though his charter conflicted with the original Rhode Island charter of
1643. Williams and his associates were forced to travel to England to nullify it. During
this ongoing controversy, the colony actually split into two distinct factions: ProvidenceWarwick and Newport-Portsmouth.
Following the initial turmoil and contention present in early Rhode Island,
Williams began making a large effort to promote civil order. In 1655, possibly directly
responding to Coddington’s attempted overthrow of the original Rhode Island charter, he
issued “A Letter to the Town of Providence,” succinctly explaining his religious liberty
theory with the metaphor of a ship’s voyage. Many people of different faiths often find
themselves on the same ship with the same purpose, just as many people could often find
themselves in the same town, village, city or colony as others with differing beliefs.
When on board the ship, “none of the Papists, Protestants, Jews, or Turks be forced to
come to the ship’s prayers or worship.”11 Similarly, colonists should not have been
punished for failing to attend the town meeting. Each town was working together in a
common goal: to survive, thrive, and prosper. Williams argued that religious conformity
is not necessary for the townspeople to work together to achieve that goal. He continued
9
Ibid, p. 45.
Ibid, p. 48.
11
Roger Williams, “A Letter to the Town of Providence,” in The Norton Anthology of American Literature,
Vol. A, ed. Nina Baym (New York: W. W. Norton & Co., 2007), p. 186.
10
on to explain exactly why this system does not have to dissolve into anarchy and chaos:
“if any refuse to help, in person or purse, towards the common charges or defense; if any
refuse to obey the common laws and orders of the ship, concerning their peace or
preservation,” they should be punished.12 He also explained that “any. . . preach[ing] or
writ[ing] that there ought to be no commander or officers, because all are equal in Christ,
therefore no masters nor officers, nor laws nor orders, nor corrections nor punishments”13
were wrong. This explanation refuted the European idea shared by the Puritans that
without a strict religious hierarchy, the community would fall apart; those who are vested
with power because they have the knowledge and experience (commanders and officers)
will “judge, resist, compel, and punish such transgressors, according to their deserts and
merits.”14 Such a system would preserve order without causing harm to those who wished
to follow different faiths.
To officially establish his plan for religious liberty and civil order, Williams
turned to the royal charter. In addition to solidifying his views on colonial government, it
would also ease some of the tension between the settlements and legitimize their claim to
Narragansett Bay, because Massachusetts Bay colony wished to control that area as well.
By the 1640s, the colony’s population had grown large enough to assert dominance over
the rest of New England. They viewed Rhode Island as a threat because Rhode Island
sheltered dissenters from Massachusetts Bay. If small communities such as Providence,
Newport, and Portsmouth were to join together as an official colony, they would pose
even more of a threat. While the Puritans’ response to dissenters was often to evict them
from the colony and think no more about them, the idea of a large group of religiously
12
Ibid.
Ibid.
14
Ibid.
13
free people so close to their colony worried them. If Rhode Island fell into league with
the devil, it would surely spread to Massachusetts Bay. As a result, they attempted to
seize authority of the same areas Williams and his peers wished to utilize as land for their
official colony. 15
In order to prevent Massachusetts Bay from having any kind of legal claim to
their land, Williams and several others traveled to England to secure their charter. Due to
the turmoil in England during the 1640s, Rhode Island was actually forced to procure two
separate charters; the first, from 1643, was nullified after Charles II came back to power
at the end of the English Civil War.16 However, both documents included a guarantee for
religious liberty. The second charter of 1663 established Rhode Island as “a livlie
experiment.”17 Never before in the history of Christian nations had anyone attempted to
separate the religion from the civil government. Yet, Williams was intent enough to that
end for Parliament to agree to this “experiment.” The charter stated, “a most flourishing
civill state may stand and best bee maintained. . . with full libertie in religious
concernments. . . to secure. . . the free exercise and enjoyment of theire civill and
religious rights. . . noe person within the sayd colonye. . . shall bee any wise molested,
punished, disquieted, or called in question, for any differences in opinion in matters of
religion.” 18 In only the second page of the charter, before it delved into any of the
specifics of operating the colony, it explicitly protected and defined the colonists’ right to
liberty of conscience, or religious freedom. However, Williams was clearly still
15
John M. Barry, “God, Government and Roger Williams’ Big Idea,” Smithsonian 42, no. 9 (January
2012): p. 72. MasterFILE Premiere, EBSCOhost. Accessed 4/17/13.
16
Ibid.
17
“The Charter of the Governor and Company of the English Colony of Rhode Island and Providence
Plantation in New England, in America, 1663,” in Records of the Colony of Rhode Island and Providence
Plantations, in New England, Vol. II, ed. John Russell Bartlett (Providence: Crawford Greene and Bro.,
1875), p. 4.
18
Ibid, p. 5.
concerned with ensuring an ordered colony, as the charter continued on to state that no
one can “use this libertie to lycentiousnesse and profanenesse, nor to the civill injurye or
outward disturbance of others.” 19 This idea tied back to the analogy with the ship.
Everyone had the right to their own religious freedom as long as they did not abuse it by
refusing to pull their weight or insist on disturbing others. At the same time that the
Rhode Island charter of 1663 legitimized the idea for religious liberty, it also added a
qualifier to ensure order reigned supreme in this new experiment, an idea made all the
more important by Rhode Island’s recent troubles.
Overall, Roger Williams’ contributions to the foundations of Rhode Island went
beyond just religious liberty. He proposed the idea of an experimental colony to
Parliament and sought to prove that it could work. In reaction to the individualists who
pushed back against the government, as well as the tensions between the settlements in
Rhode Island, he stressed the need for civil order just as much as religious liberty. In
doing so, he may have paved the way for Rhode Island succeeding as a colony, rather
than dissolving in dissension and becoming absorbed by the Massachusetts Bay Puritans.
19
Ibid, p. 5-6.
Bibliography
Barry, John M. “God, Government and Roger Williams’ Big Idea.” Smithsonian 42, no. 9
(January 2012): 72. MasterFILE Premiere, EBSCOhost. Accessed 4/17/13.
Bozeman, Theodore Dwight. “Religious Liberty and the Problem of Order in Early
Rhode Island.” The New England Quarterly 45, no. 1 (March 1972): 44-64,
http://0-www.jstor.org.helin.uri.edu/stable/364222. Accessed 4/17/13.
“The Charter of the Governor and Company of the English Colony of Rhode Island and
Providence Plantation in New England, in America, 1663.” In Records of the
Colony of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, in New England, Vol. II,
edited by John Russell Bartlett, 3-6. Providence: Crawford Greene and Bro.,
1875.
Mofford, Juliet Haines.“The Devil Made me Do It!”. Gilford, CT: Globe Pequot Press,
2012.
Williams, Roger. A Bloudy Tenet of Persecution for Cause of Conscience. London, 1644.
EEBO. PDF. Accessed 4/11/13.
—. “A Letter to the Town of Providence.” In The Norton Anthology of American
Literature, Vol. A, edited by Nina Baym, 186-7. New York: W. W. Norton &
Co., 2007.
Winthrop, John. “Christian Charity, A Model Hereof.” In Puritans in the New World, A
Critical Anthology, edited by David D. Hall, 165-70. Princeton: Princeton
University Press, 2004.