Roger Williams was an English man born in 1603 and died in March 1683. His father James Williams was a blacksmith. He was born to the English Church of London during his life; he served as a clergyman and colonist (Garret 45). While in India, he worked as a magistrate, farmer, trader, and author. He was devoted to God and sought to walk in holiness, making him different from all churches. He believed that as a seeker, he was supposed to propagate deep truths of the gospel that seemed to be missing in every church he went. On account of this, he founded the Rhode Island and Providence town; these were to be places of refuge for the religious minorities. He lived to defend his strong religious principles in the quest for a walk-in purity and being close to God (Payne 4). As a result, he was never able to find any Christian congregation with all the marks that he was looking for. He had an interesting personality. This essay explains why in my opinion he is said to have had an interesting personality.
Rogers was a non-conformist right from an early age. He defies the father’s decision at the age of 12, failing to conform to the dad’s choice, and he becomes a Puritan (Payne 4). He did not have to go by what he found in place but by his convictions. This comes out on several occasions as discussed below. He left England when he was displeased with the way of the Puritanical society, and this became a reason for founding Rhode Island, a community that would be able to tolerate religion. He was unable to conform to the teachings and leadership of Archbishop William Lauds. He terms the church in England as one involved in grievous sin, that no one should even associate within fellowship (Bakratchera 6). He, therefore, looks at the church in England as sinful. Any association or fellowship with them was sinful in his opinion.
The world was too sinful and one needed to keep uncontaminated in wait for Christ’s coming. Massachusetts believed their society was being redeemed, but he never thought of it this way. He, therefore, failed to conform to the Massachusetts puritans who felt they needed civil protection (Reuben 3). He felt the church in Massachusetts was impure and needed to separate them from the corrupt of the Anglican Church spiritually. He wouldn’t conform to their belief and went on to Boston.
Leaving the Massachusetts church, he went to Plymouth church. He found the church here to be too impure and wouldn’t once again conform to their impurity. He therefore left and went to Salem. Later in Salem, after he is appointed a minister, he fails to conform to the civil authority rule in the land and differs with the authority over the judging of transgressions of the Decalogue (Morgan 23). He failed to conform to the theological believes upheld by the Puritans.
In Salem, William differs from the Salem Christians. Contrary to what they expect, William uses his sermons to express his opinions. He is said to have been charged before a court for introducing new divers and strange teachings that were dangerous. He used to bring out his opinions, termed as dangerous. He eventually has to go to exile. In Providence, William sets up strong rules on equality. He goes against the odd of inequality prevailing in the land at the time. He fails to conform to what is popularly practiced and believed, helping set up a democracy in land association. During and after his stay in India, in his quest for spiritual perfection, he fails to adhere to any creed, contrary to what was believed, that one has to adhere to a specific creed. He, therefore, fails to conform to this common belief and chooses his way. He refuses to conform to the evil in India and Puritans and instead comes up with tight rules to tame the people’s evil (Bakratchera 7).
Rogers fails to conform to the belief that churches were succeeding the Jewish temples, which had made the church and the state inseparable entities. In all his writings, therefore, he fought for the separation of the church from the state which he termed as the world. He was able to separate the church from the state, and God from the governance. He argued that nothing would be done by the church in harmony with the government and still brings glory to God (Reuben 6). After all, the government was evil, and the church meant to be holy. To condemn this, he used the convictions based on Lutheran, Calvinist, Anabaptist and separatism. He, therefore, ended up forming a religion that was felt to be irrelevant to the public.
Rogers feels that the king of England has been represented as a Christian falsely. He writes a letter, charging the king of the time, King James the first, of blaspheme. On account of this, he denounces the charter of the Massachusetts Company. He differs from the idea of giving the king the right to give the land. He goes against some oaths, calling them unchristian oaths. He, therefore, revokes the Massachusetts charter (Garret 57). He goes against the idea of the government punishing lawbreakers of the Decalogue, arguing that the government and church are separate entities and after all the government was evil.
In 1652, William finds a split colony in Providence. The prevailing situation is that of division, as a result of a land grant from England. He goes against the odds and unites the colony. New England puritans practiced orthodoxy. When he went to the setup, he failed to conform to their beliefs. He also failed to conform to the theologies upheld by the Quakers. He openly critics the Quakers church and their leader. Contrary to moderate beliefs practiced by Puritanism, he embraced radical stands. He chose to go by the principles of the Baptist church (Garret 60). He agreed with them on the rejection of the baptism of infants. However, he didn’t stay in the Baptist for long. He could not conform to their antipedobaptist principle which he found to be faulty as well. He was forced to leave ultimately, as he considered the church to have lost ordinances that needed strong divine interventions to be regained (Payne). He was unable to conform to the beliefs of any church, though he remained a Christian. William fails to conform to the popular England belief that religious infractions are punishable by magistrates.
The magistrates’ trial to force citizens’ oath meets opposition from Rogers. The colonists were imposing this oath on the colonists in pursuit of the colonists’ loyalty. He fails to agree with them and instead argues that it’s only Christ’s rulership that should be established through oaths. He refers to the magistrates as unregenerate men (Morgan 23).
Works Cited
Bakratchera, Jude. “Native voices.” American passages vol2.issue 1(2009): pg4.
Garret, John and Roger Williams, witness beyond Christendom. New York: Macmillan Publishers, 1970. Print.
Morgan, Edmund. “Puritan Political Ideas”. Indiana polis: Hackett publishers, 1965. Print.
Payne, Ernest. Rogers Williams, (1603-1683). New York: Independent Press publishers, 1961. Print.
Reuben, Paul. “Perspectives in American Literature”, Providence journal, 2.1(2009):5-10.