1638. Up to this time, Williams was an Independent and a pædo-baptist.* His views respecting liberty of conscience had been already formed. No change of opinion respecting infant baptism could affect those views. His notions of liberty and indefeasible right were not determined by the meaning of a rite, or the appropriateness of a ceremonial. He had a soul above all such littleness. In 1639, he adopted baptist views, and became the founder and pastor of the first baptist church in America.† A few months later he doubted the propriety of the whole proceeding, resigned his pastorate, and became unsettled in his views respecting the ministry and ordinances of the church of Christ. Still, he retained his former Independent principles, in all their threefold integrity; and when he came to England in 1643, was in all probability the means of winning over to the side of truth and justice some influential parties, who till that period were Congregational Independents only. * Modern baptist writers should remember this, when they claim Williams as one of their sect. Mr. Underhill states the fact, but would avoid the inference. Hence his statement, in p. 26 of the Biographical Introduction, about "infant baptism and persecution." Surely, in Williams' case there was no "sisterly embrace" between those two things! We can understand how it is possible for pædobaptists to persecute anti-pædobaptists, and for anti-pædobaptists to persecute pædobaptists; but how either infant baptism or adult baptism, sprinkling or immersion, should be essentially connected with persecution, we cannot dis cover. This church was formed in the same way as that of Mr. Smith, at Amsterdam. See back, vol. ii. p. 291. A Mr. Holliman, an unbaptized person, first baptized Mr. Williams, then Mr. Williams baptized Mr. Holliman, and so on. His mission to England was of a special nature. He was sent by the colonists to obtain a charter for Rhode Island. At an earlier period, he would have found some difficulty in obtaining it. It had been a project of Laud's, to bring all the colonial settlements in New England under prelatical rule, and Charles would have favoured his scheme, if the opportunity had offered of carrying it into effect. When Williams arrived in London, he found Charles at war with his subjects, Laud a prisoner, and the old established hierarchy superseded by the assembly at Westminster. He could not have come at a more opportune crisis. The government at home was in an unsettled state, and had by no means determined, as yet, what shape the charter of British liberties should assume. It was not likely therefore to be very fastidious in its examination of the charter which Williams solicited on behalf of " Providence Plantations in the Narragansett Bay." On March 14th, 1644, the charter was granted, giving the colonists full power to adopt whatever form of government they preferred. The form of government ultimately adopted, was democratic, and the following words concluded the document in which the general assembly of the colony drew up their admirable code: "And otherwise than thus, what is herein forbidden, all men may walk as their consciences persuade them, every one in the name of his God. And let the saints of the Most High walk in this colony without molestation, in the name of Jehovah their God, for ever and ever." These memorable proceedings are attributable to Roger Williams. The work, of which the pilgrim fathers had laid the foundation, was perfected by one whom they had driven into exile; and the most flou rishing republic the world has ever seen owes much of its present grandeur, and will be indebted for its future stability, to those great and abiding principles, which the founder of Rhode Island was the first to embody in a written code of laws.* Williams contributed in many ways to the cause of religious liberty during the few months of his sojourn in London. He arrived shortly after the Westminster Assembly had met in 1643, and remained until the summer of the following year. His mission brought him into contact with some of the chief members of parliament, and with the leaders of the Independent party. Colonial affairs were managed at that time by a board of commissioners, at the head of which was Lord Warwick. Every facility was afforded him in prosecuting his object; especially by Sir Harry Vane, with whom he formed an intimate friendship. The change which took place in the opinions of that eminent member of the House of Commons and of the Assembly may in some measure be accounted for from this circumstance. Up to this period Vane had been a Congregational Independent only, and had co-operated with the Assembly in many of its intolerant proceedings; but from the time of his intercourse with Williams, he became an openly avowed advocate of unlimited toleration. Besides this, Williams wrote an exposition of his views in opposition to Cotton and the New England Congregationalists, and published it in 1644, under the title of "The Bloudy Tenent of Persecution for Cause of Conscience discussed, in a Conference between Truth and Peace." This work, dedicated to "the High * The "Bloudy Tenent," etc.: Biographical Introduction. Reprinted by the Hanserd Knollys Society. 1848. Court of Parliament," is replete with the results of prolonged thought and inquiry, and, notwithstanding the haste with which it was composed, is to the present time one of the ablest works ever given to the world on the momentous subject of which it treats. It was read with great eagerness by many in that day, and tended very much, by the convictions it produced, to strengthen the hands of the friends of liberty. The influence of these men-Goodwin and Williams -was very great. They formed and represented the opinions of many both in London and the provinces. Many churches, similar to the one in Southwark over which Stephen More presided, were gathered in the metropolis and other parts of England. Their pastors were, for the most part, thorough Independents. Differing from one another on minor points, as on the subject of baptism or predestination, they were agreed in regarding religion as a matter between God and the soul, with which magistracy and human law had no concern. In 1643 and 1644, several of the baptist churches in London published a Confession of Faith, expressing these views; in which many other churches in the country sympathised. The church at Stepney, of which Henry Burton became the pastor, was formed at this time, and continues to the present day. But the great majority of the churches which originated at this period had only an ephemeral being. In the strife, confusion, and persecutions of later periods, they were scattered; and it is only from the general statements of contemporary writers that their existence can be ascertained. The names of their ministers have also perished. Only a few of the more prominent survive in the records of the period. To those already mentioned, may be added the names of Jesse, Spilsbury, Saltmarsh, Richardson, Hanserd Knollys, John Simpson, and William Bartlet, men of character and principle, all of whom held, more or less nearly, the opinions of Goodwin and Williams respecting the rights of conscience. It would appear that the discussions of this period led some of the persons whose opinions have already been adverted to, to review their position with advantage. Burton, for example, became more decided respecting the question of state interference with religion. It so happened that the three martyrs of the pillory became divided in sentiment; Bastwick and Prynne siding with the presbyterians, and Burton pressing boldly on to right and scriptural grounds. A warm controversy sprang up between the three; first between Burton and Prynne in 1644, and in the following year between Burton and Bastwick. production of the lawyer is characterized by his usual ability and learning, not without a considerable spice of bitterness; that of the physician by a ludicrously rabid enmity to the Independents; while Burton's replies are replete with comprehensive and scriptural views respecting the duty of the state at that crisis, and are pervaded by a spirit of great Christian forbearance. His "Vindication of the Churches com The * Prynne's work is entitled, "Twelve Considerable Serious Questions, Touching Church Government: &c." Bastwick's is "Independency not God's Ordinance: &c.," afterwards enlarged and published as "The Utter Routing of the whole Army of all the Independents and Sectaries, &c." 1646. See copious extracts from all these in Hanbury, vols. ii. and iii. Burton's reply to Prynne is entitled, "A Vindication of Churches commonly called Independent: &c." 1644. His reply to Bastwick is "Vindicia Veritatis: Truth vindicated against |