1. The key contradiction at the heart of Puritan theology is the belief that in the priesthood
of all believers. This belief holds that every individual has direct access to God through
faith, and that there is no need for priests or bishops to interpret or convey god's will. In
my opinion, this challenged any attempts by leaders to assert authority, as it
compromises the traditional hierarchy of authority within the church.
Rothbard, Suppressing Heresy The Flight of Roger Williams, 1
2. Coerced religion is the use of force to impose religious beliefs or practices on individuals
or groups. Williams found coerced religion objectionable because it goes against the
principle of religious freedom and the idea that true faith cannot be forced on someone.
Williams believed that true religion must come from the heart and be a choice made by
the person.
Rothbard, Suppressing Heresy The Flight of Roger Williams, 2
3. Williams disagreed with the Puritan leaders' policy of forcibly removing Native Americans
from their land and taking it for themselves. He believed that the land belonged to the
Native Americans and that the colonists had no right to take it without their consent. He
advocated for peaceful coexistence and fair treatment of Native Americans and believed
that taking their land without compensation was unjust.
Rothbard, Suppressing Heresy The Flight of Roger Williams, 2
He was also opposed to the punishment given to those who held different views and the
punishment of those who did not conform to the religious views of the leaders, which he
believed to be in violation of the individuals freedom of conscience.
Rothbard, Suppressing Heresy The Flight of Roger Willaims, 1
4. If I were immigrating to North America in the mid 1660’s, one colony where I would find
religious freedom would be providence, Rhode Island under the leadership of Roger
Williams. Williams believed in the separation of church and state, and advocated for
religious freedom and liberty of conscience. He established a colony where individuals
were free to practice their own religion without fear of persecution or punishment.
In contrast, in New Netherland, New France, Massachusetts, and Maryland, religious
toleration was present but not religious freedom. In New Netherland, the Dutch allowed
for religious toleration among the settlers, but the colony was dominated by the Dutch
church, which was the official state church. In New France, the catholic church was the
dominant religion, and it was mandated by the government, but there was also some
tolerance for other religions like protestantism. In Massachusetts, the puritans were in
control and they established a state sanctioned church and the dissenters were
punished. Maryland also allowed for religious toleration.
For religious freedom and toleration the providence Williams ran stood out as the colony
where religious freedom was accepted. This is because Williams believed that the
government had no right to impose religious beliefs or practices on the people, and that
individuals had the right to practice their own religion without being punished. Even
though some colonies may have had religious toleration, there was no right to actually
practice their own religion.
In conclusion, there is a difference between freedom and toleration. Tolerance is when
they allow different religions to coexist but it does not fully guarantee freedom of religion.
On the other hand, religious freedom means that people can practice their own religion
without being punished. The providence ran by Williams is a perfect example of how
both religious “freedom” and “toleration” should be understood.
5. The most surprising thing I’ve learned so far would be the treatment of the Native
Americans. I’ve learned throughout the years of history that they had been abused and
banished from their land but did not fully understand the extent of the abuse. My views
haven’t totally changed because I knew they had been abused and banished but they
have changed in understanding how roughly and unjustly the Native Americans were
treated.