Roger Williams: The Church and the State

by Edmund S. Morgan

An illuminating portrait of the nation's earliest―and most passionate―advocate for the total separation of church and state. A classic of its kind, Edmund S. Morgan's Roger Williams skillfully depicts the intellectual life of the man who, after his expulsion in 1635 from the Massachusetts Bay Colony, founded what would become Rhode Island. As Morgan re-creates the evolution of Williams's thoughts on the nature of the church and the state, he captures with characteristic economy and precision the institutions that informed Williams's worldview, from the Protestant church in England to the Massachusetts government in the seventeenth century. In doing so, Morgan reveals the origins of a perennial―and heated―American debate, told through the ideas of one of the most brilliant polemicists on the subject, a man whose mind, as Morgan describes, "drove him to examine accepted ideas and carry them to unacceptable conclusions." Forty years after its first publication, Roger Williams remains essential reading for anyone interested in the church, the state, and the right relation of the two.

Genres: History, Biography, American History, Nonfiction, Religion, American

186 pages, Paperback

First published May 28, 1997

About the author

Edmund Sears Morgan

Reviews

[M.J. · Rating 4 out of 5]

Of course I liked this book. If you're not interested in good ol' Roger or church-state relations in the 1640s, then this one isn't for you. But...if you are...then this book is easy to read and very informative!

[Brian Collins · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a very helpful interpretation of Roger Williams's thought. It is not a biographical study, though biographical details are included when relevant to Williams's thought. In sum Williams seems to have had true insights that were contrary to the customary thought of the time, but he held to these insights with such rigor that he drove himself into other errors. For instance Williams was correct to believe that the church needed a pure membership that was separate from the mixed state church. But he drove this to such an extreme that he could no longer fellowship with the Separatists at Plymouth because the church did not reprimand members who listened to Puritan (Anglican) preaching while traveling in England. Also, Williams was convinced that if worship was to be kept pure, unbelievers must not participate in any part of worship. This meant that unbelievers should not be permitted to listen to preaching in church because preaching was part of worship (the gospel could be proclaimed to the lost outside church). It meant that families should not pray together if some of the children were unsaved because prayer was part of worship. Williams also rightly recognized that a pure church ideal leads to a baptist position, but he left the Baptists in Rhode Island because he also believed in the necessity of apostolic succession for baptism to be valid and he believed that the Antichrist had ended that succession.
Williams is perhaps best known for his thinking on religious liberty. Morgan helpfully points out that the difference between Williams and the Puritans on this matter has its root in their different understandings in the way the Old Testament relates to the New. The Puritans thought their colony was like Israel. It was in a covenant with God. God would bless them if their colony obeyed God’s laws; He would judge them if they disobeyed. They copied the laws of Moses when writing their own laws. They thought the responsibility of Old Testament kings to keep idolatry out of Israel was the responsibility of their government also. Williams disagreed. He said that Israel was a shadow of the church. The Old Testament laws and the examples of Old Testament rulers were pictures of Christ and the church. Modern day rulers should not take those teachings literally. Williams said that the government’s only purpose was to protect people’s bodies and goods from harm. Rulers did not need to be Christians to that. Furthermore, most rulers in the world were not Christians. Williams did not trust rulers to make right decisions about what religion should be practiced in their countries. He said that people should be free to worship according to their consciences. It did not matter if they were Puritans, Quakers, Muslims, or atheists. Again, Williams saw some important things that the Puritans missed (though both of them erred in their relation of the Testaments), and yet Williams also seems to be a first step toward American secularism. I see no biblical problem in allowing freedom of worship within moral bounds for other religions, keeping the church and state distinct, while also requiring state officials to recognize Christianity as the moral compass for the nations laws. Many states adopted this approach even after the Constitution went into effect.

[Jeffrey Williams · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is not a standard biography of Roger Williams, the Puritan founder of Rhode Island colony. If this is your first exposure to him, please take my advice and pass on this book since you will be lost. Read a biography or two of Williams first before tackling this one.

What Edmund S. Morgan accomplished here is nothing short of amazing. He gives a very good contrast to the thoughts and writings of Roger Williams and how he differed from other scholars of his era, especially in Puritan and Separatist thought of the day. If you read Morgan's "The Puritan's Dilemma," you will find the conflict between Massachusetts Bay Governor John Winthrop and Roger Williams. However, Morgan doesn't fully explain the theological differences between Williams and Winthrop or their differences in how the state should be governed. In this book, we see the separation clearly. There clearly ARE major differences betweeen Puritan and Separatist theology even if they both originate out of Calvinism. Williams philosophy on governing the state is also made much clearer in this volume.

This is an important work on understanding key concepts in the history of New England. It cannot be the first book read on this history of Williams, New England or Rhode Island colony (I guarantee you that it will put you to sleep if it is), but it is important enough to ensure that it goes onto your reading list around the same location as Morgan's "The Puritan's Dilemma." This seems to be a companion book to that one.

[Liam · Rating 5 out of 5]

"'Our grand security is in the multitude of sects and the public Liberty necessary for them to cohabit together. ... This and this only will learn us wisdom not to persecute one another.'" (quoting Ezra Stiles, x)

"Roger Williams lived in what he called 'wonderful, searching, disputing and dissenting times.'" (3)

"The clergy of New England were not a corporate body. A minister was a minister only with respect to his own church, and if ministers occasionally met in synods to determine difficult questions of policy, the meetings were not regular and their determinations were not binding. On many questions clerical opinion varied widely." (79)

"Christ protected His churches by the two-edged sword of the Spirit, exercised in preaching, discipline, and the sacraments. By accepting the alleged help of the temporal sword, a church proclaimed itself false." (98)

"In identifying this source of divine wrath [abusing God's messengers], Williams was deliberately turning the tables on those who argued for religious intolerance as a means of escaping wrath. Throughout history the civil magistrates who exerted their powers to punish false prophets had succeeded only in offending God, for magistrates were generally incapable of recognizing a true servant of God when they saw one." (105)

"Without denying that war might sometimes be necessary, he did deny that it could ever be holy. Since the time of Israel no people could properly claim to fight for God." (123)

[Donn Headley · Rating 4 out of 5]

While reading this intellectual semi-biography of the Puritan theologian and founder of Rhode Island, I was reminded of my recent reading of Rod Dreher's The Benedict Option. Much of Williams's theology on both orthodoxy and orthopraxy says much about the value of approaching the temptations and pitfalls of prosperity with suspicion and caution. Like Williams, Dreher also calls Christians to live simply and givingly to their community and to see the great value and virtues that arise from suffering, poverty, work, and service. On the church and the state, Williams was very much out of step with his contemporaries in believing that the church should exert no direct influence on the government (while still expecting full protection of the freedom of individual conscience) while also understanding that the state (as a fully worldly institution) must refrain from interfering in affairs of the Christian community. Many of Williams' ideas would still be out of the mainstream today: for example, that church affairs should be geared only to the elect; that Williams eventually could only fully depend upon and trust a church of two, himself and his wife, being uncertain about the election of anyone else. Morgan is one of our finest writers in the historical field, but he is a historian operating under historiographical methodology. To his credit, he does not attempt to assess Williams' ideas as a theologian. But he clearly admires Williams as a thinker and a church leader of integrity and courage. The reader will come to appreciate Williams in the same light while also assessing the extremely complex relationship of the church and the state and the history of those ideas with greater perception. Modern American political society on both the left and the right underestimate the complexity of these institutions and their relationship. This book can help thinking Americans come to important insights and contemplate the best methods for protecting the integrity and strength of both institutions for the common good.

[Charles Williams · Rating 4 out of 5]

Helpful overview of the contours and development of Roger Williams's thought on church/state relations and his notion of liberty of conscience.

The long and short: Williams wanted a pure church so badly that he came to believe that no true church existed, that all the churches has been corrupted by the Antichrist - which he saw not only as emanating from Rome, but also Canterbury. Due to his rather, ahem, idiosyncratic notions of church purity, he advocated for a total separation between church and state that allowed the individual to worship free from any form of government influence in religious matters.

If I could characterize Morgan's profile of Williams, it would be something like this: Williams was held to schismatic views of church purity (think 4th century Donatism) while contending for a spirituality of the church that (in some ways) sounds reminiscent of 19th century southern Presbyterianism, all wrapped in a New England Congregationalist garb, with a dash of Anne Hutchinson and a splash of crazy.

This book is worth reading, but man oh man I can't make heads or tails what to make of this guy. Some things he argued seem not only helpful, but were clearly influential in shaping later 18th century thought on church/state relations. Yet other things mentioned in this book - most things - come straight from crazy town.

[Jonathan A. · Rating 4 out of 5]

While written in 1967, Morgan's deep analysis of Williams continues to hold great relevance and importance for today. Morgan carefully considers the nuances not only of Williams' theology, but of the milieu of the time and how Williams differs, even if only slightly. It is very clear and carefully written. Not a book that one will read quickly, but one that is full of insight. As we continue to hear some Christians continue to claim that the United States is a "Christian Nation," or other flavors of Christian Nationalism we need to remember the insights not only of Jefferson and Madison but also of Roger Williams.

[Renan Abreu · Rating 3 out of 5]

Uma boa introdução ao pensamento político de Roger Williams. Trabalha razoavelmente bem o plano de fundo de toda controvérsia.

[Becky · Rating 5 out of 5]

I love Edmund Morgan. What a great little book.

[Mark · Rating 4 out of 5]

An intellectual history of Roger Williams's ideas about the relationship of the state to religion that sets those ideas squarely within the context of orthodox Puritanism. This fall, I'll assign it in my colonial history course and see if my undergraduates can benefit from Morgan's praise of Williams's willingness to think for himself and to have the courage of his convictions.

[Colin · Rating 3 out of 5]

Facinating insight into the thought of the man who founded Rhode Island, Roger Williams.

[Joseph Novak · Rating 4 out of 5]

A helpful overview of Williams' works; an academic presentation of a polemist's writings. Good, short bio in the first chapter.

[Ayla · Rating 3 out of 5]

A nice quick read with a lot of interesting information to help clarify both Williams' ideas and the ideas of Puritan New England.

[Dr. Carl Ludwig Dorsch · Rating 3 out of 5]

Not completely sure if this is the volume I read...

[Thomas Bonar · Rating 5 out of 5]

READ THIS !!!!!!!!