Roger and Me and the Quest for Spiritual Freedom

Prior to the elevation of Donald Trump—the first time—by a majority of white evangelicals, I grew tired of satirizing the American political God-game, and moved on to covering other topics such as the craft culture and secular spiritualities that I discovered upon moving to the Pacific Northwest in 2014. But the 2016 election stirred within me the bones of my 11th-great-grandfather Roger Williams (ca. 1603-1683), the founder of present-day Rhode Island and of the first Baptist church in America. Not least, he was also a 17^th-century pioneer of religious liberty. Just as he spoke out against injustices fueled by politicized religiosity, I realized I was called to do likewise.^[1]

Williams felt that to try to impose a particular doctrinal, denominational pattern on a colony or society was folly, an offense to God and to the human pluralism God created.

For those who think the rise of the religious right represents a new trend in American Christianity, history shows otherwise. The myth of American exceptionalism, the claim that America should shine forth as an exemplar of the Protestant Christian faith, is at least as old as the original 13 colonies: the first Governor of the Massachusetts Bay Colony, John Winthrop, coined the famous phrase, “a city upon a hill,” as early as 1630.

Religious Freedom for Whom?

In Smithsonian magazine, Kenneth C. Davis debunks the commonly held belief that the Pilgrims and Puritans came to America in search of authentic religious freedom where everyone could be free to worship as they please. “From the earliest arrival of Europeans on America’s shores, religion has often been a cudgel, used to discriminate, suppress and even kill the foreign, the ‘heretic’ and the ‘unbeliever’—including the ‘heathen’ natives already here.”^[2]

The use of the language of religion to justify secular power is of course not a new dynamic. What was arguably new was that a colony might aspire to become the embodiment of the “New Israel,” in the idiom of the times—an attempt to live up to the highest ideals of Christianity as the colonists understood them. And they each understood them differently.

This is perhaps most obvious in the Massachusetts Bay Colony Puritans under Winthrop. As historian Daniel Rodgers writes: “His appropriation of the language of God’s chosen people, his repurposing of the scriptural text for the New Englanders’ own circumstances, his reading of God’s providential hand in every detail of their venture, his confidence that he could pierce the analogies between modern and biblical time: these were all audacious acts. Roger Williams quailed at the hubris.”^[3]

Separation of Church and Coercion

In his opposition to this kind of language, Williams originated the principle of separation of church and state. As leader of the colony of Providence, quite removed from the theocratic ideas at work in Massachusetts to the north, he argued against the very notion of a “Christian nation” on the grounds that those who call themselves Christians are bound to Christ by faith and repentance, not by government authority or coercion. 

I think this foundational American figure of Christian conscience and dissent would be appalled at the sight of Jerry Falwell and other powerful latter-day public figures draping the cross of Christ with the American flag. He would not for a nanosecond have comprehended their interpretation of a God who advances the notion of American exceptionalism while damning those to hell who do not follow in their way, truth, and light. He would surely have denounced it as nothing other than political bullying masquerading as religion. Nor would he be sympathetic, I think, to those progressive Christians seeking to organize their own newfangled forms of partisan faith-based politics.

“God requireth not an uniformity of Religion to be inacted and inforced in any civill state,” Williams once declared. And famously: “Forced worship stinks in God’s nostrils.”^[4]

Honoring the Pluralism God Created

Williams’s insight into church-state separation was so persuasive that it influenced the Bill of Rights of the U.S. Constitution: the principle of free expression of religion is inscribed in the First Amendment. Ignoring this wisdom, Winthrop’s “City on the Hill” remains a well-worn metaphor among religious and political pundits who wish to impart their particular brand of religion onto the rest of the nation and world.

The spirit of Williams has much to teach the governance of congregations as well. He practiced a strict piety in his personal life that he taught to those who chose to attend any church he pastored. However, he felt that to try to impose a particular doctrinal, denominational pattern on a colony or society was folly, an offense to God and to the human pluralism God created. 

Some self-proclaimed experts ranging from evangelical conservative to mainline progressive continue to proclaim that “If you build a better church they will come.” On the rare occasion when these church entities take a public stand on a public controversy, their declarations tend to favor majority rule, thus casting aside those minority viewpoints who find themselves once again on the outside unable to have a voice at the main table. 

Group-Think Unwelcome Here

Gatherings of this nature would probably have sent Williams running for the hills. As he got older, he became less and less patient with organized faith. Instead of group-think consensus, he preferred the cacophony of disparate free thinkers arguing passionately in the public square. Williams vigorously engaged in theological debates and was tolerant of opposing views, in comparison with other Puritan religious leaders who required strict conformity to their brand of religion in order for one to be part of their particular faith community. Even though he despised many tenets of the Quaker faith, he invited Anne Hutchinson to establish a meeting house in Newport, Rhode Island, after she was exiled from the Massachusetts Bay Colony. Even atheists (“heretics”) were permitted to reside in Rhode Island.

In this respect, I believe he would agree with comedian, actor, marathon runner, and aspiring politician Suzy Izzard when she opined, “I believe the melting pot is the thing that can save the world.”^[5]

Such a vision of spiritual solidarity beyond the polemics of creed or politics can have the positive effect of acknowledging, respecting, and amplifying individual voices even on those issues where a group consensus prevails. As philosopher Martha Nussbaum observes, “The idea of an overlapping consensus, or, to put it Williams’s way, the idea of a moral and natural goodness that we can share while differing on ultimate religious ends, is an idea that helps us think about our common life together much better than the unclear and at times misleading idea of separation.”^[6]

Too Satirical to Satirize

During yet another election cycle too satirical to satirize, progressive minded Christian leaders responded to concerns over the rise of Christian Nationalism by forming groups such as Christians for Harris. However, in lieu of promoting a kinder and gentler melding of church and state, perhaps they should target those voters who claim no religious affiliation. The number of those leaving the Christian faith, and evangelicalism in particular, continues to grow, with one-quarter of Americans (27 percent) classifying themselves as religiously unaffiliated.^[7]

This statistic seems to indicate that a growing percentage of the U.S. populace might be interested in leaving the Winthrop way behind and walking with Williams instead. Without guilt-ridden dogmas, they feel free to choose a path that speaks to them. Some find occasional comfort in a church, synagogue, temple, or mosque that truly welcomes all and aims to be a place of healing and not a means to harm others. Others will choose to worship, reflect, or meditate in other equally valid ways outside of traditional religious structures. 

Case in point, when researching my book Distilled in Washington: A History, I found a welcoming spirit in brewpubs and tasting rooms. As I discovered, these places assumed the communal role once held by the institutional church where people came together for friendship, sponsored local fundraisers, and engaged in other grassrootsy community-building endeavors.

Like Roger before me, I’ve become a seeker who is no longer saved but still searches. As an apophatic agnostic Anglican, the more I connect with spiritual atheists, agnostics, and religious exiles banished from the institutional church both living and dead, the more I realize that while we all think for ourselves, we often speak a similar language at our core that connects us in our shared humanity.

Becky Garrison ’92 M.Div./M.S.W. (a Yale/Columbia University joint program) is the author of eight books and is a former contributing editor for The Wittenburg Door, the religious satire magazine. She has served on the board since the site’s online relaunch in 2021. Her books include Red and Blue God, Black and Blue Church (Jossey-Bass, 2011), Distilled in Washington: A History (History Press, 2024), and the forthcoming Gaslighting for God: A Satirical Guidebook for Spotting Spiritual Narcissists, slated for publication by Lake Drive Books in 2026.