RESPECT

[Salty]

In GB you had the established church (Anglican w/the king or Queen at the head) and then everyone else (the non-conformists) who were considered by the establishment to be 2nd class rabble, not posh and not elite like the Anglican’s.

And then the Purtians acted the same way to anyone who did not agree with them. Thus the reason the Roger Williams began a Baptist church in Rhode Island.

 

[JonC]

And then the Purtians acted the same way to anyone who did not agree with them. Thus the reason the Roger Williams began a Baptist church in Rhode Island.

Was Roger Williams a Baptist?

 

[Salty]

Was Roger Williams a Baptist?

He was ordained by the Church of England - but did not accept baby baptism - some six months after starting First Baptist - he left and became a seeker.
He was also a strong believer in separation of Church and State
Roger Williams - Wikipedia

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

And then the Purtians acted the same way to anyone who did not agree with them. Thus the reason the Roger Williams began a Baptist church in Rhode Island.

The Puritans are Anglican. Thank God for Welsh non conformists. Hint, they don’t like establishment anything. Has something to do with working in coal mines I’m thinking.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

The Puritans are Anglican. Thank God for Welsh non conformists. Hint, they don’t like establishment anything. Has something to do with working in coal mines I’m thinking.

Better yet, ask Pastor Durant... he is related to him

 

[JonC]

He was ordained by the Church of England - but did not accept baby baptism - some six months after starting First Baptist - he left and became a seeker.
He was also a strong believer in separation of Church and State
Roger Williams - Wikipedia

A seeker?

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

A seeker?

not really....from wiki

Both enemies and admirers sometimes called him a "Seeker", associating him with a heretical movement that accepted Socinianism and Universal Reconciliation, but Williams rejected both of these ideas.[23]

 

[canadyjd]

We certainly have freedom of religion, but I can't help but wonder if the drafters of the U.S. Constitution felt that freedom of religion was freedom to worship Jesus as we see fit and not acceptance of all non-Christian faiths.
In one early writing that I heard of, the author referred to non-Christian faiths as "heathen practices" and not religion. I personally don't think that the founders were open and accepting of religions other than the Christian religion.

If I remember history correctly, the push for the “establishment” clause came, at least in part, from Baptists who did not want to pay taxes to the state that would be used to support the “official” church. (Anglican or Presbyterian?)

So, it’s not just that you can worship as you see fit, but also that you cannot be forced to support something you don’t agree with.

peace to you