¹ Letter of John Cotton (1643) and Roger Williams' Reply (London, 1644)Google Scholar; Cotton, John, Master John Cotton's Answer to Master Roger Williams (London, 1644)Google Scholar; Williams, Roger, The Bloody Tenent of Persecution … (London, 1644)Google Scholar; Cotton, John, The Controversy concerning Liberty of Conscience (London, 1646)Google Scholar; Cotton, John, The Bloody Tenent washed and made white in the Blood of the Lamb, (London, 1647)Google Scholar; Williams, Roger, The Bloody Tenent yet more Bloody (London, 1652).Google Scholar All these pamphlets are published in modern editions by the Narragansett Club, which are used here except for Cotton, 's “The Bloody Tenent washed …”Google Scholar which we quote from the original edition.

² Cotton, Hooker, and Davenport were invited to take part in the Westminster Assembly, but they declined. See Miller, Perry, Orthodoxy in Massachusetts (Cambridge, 1933), 276.Google Scholar

³ On the same subject, see Parkes, Henry Bamford, “John Cotton and Roger Williams Debate Toleration, 1644–1652,” in New England Quarterly, IV, 735–56.Google Scholar Parkes emphasizes the medieval features in Cotton.

⁴ Jordan, W. K., The Development of Seligious Toleration in England, from the Convention of the Long Parliament to the Restoration, 1640–1660 (Cambridge, 1938), 51–52.Google Scholar

⁵ The Bloody Tenent of Persecution, 24Google Scholar

⁶ The Controversy concerning Liberty of Conscience, 7–8.Google Scholar

⁷ See Heim, Karl, Das Gewissheitsproblem in der systematischen Theologie bis zu Schleiermacher (Leipzig, 1911), esp. 176.Google Scholar

⁸ Some Treasure fetched out of Rubbish (London, 1660), 19Google Scholar

⁹ Miller, Perry, The New England Mind (New York, 1939), 107.Google Scholar

¹⁰ Some Treasure fetched out of Rubbish, 25Google Scholar

¹¹ The Bloody Tenent still wore Bloody, 67Google Scholar

¹² The Bloody Tenent of Persecution, 63.Google Scholar See also Ernst, JamesThe Political Thought of Roger Williams (Seattle, 1929), 178–179Google Scholar

¹³ See A Dissuasive from the Errors of the Time … (London 1645), 57Google Scholar

¹⁴ Kühn, Johannes, Toleranz und Offenbarung (Leipzig, 1923)Google Scholar, in. a chapter on Williams emphasizes also this point; see 168.

¹⁵ “The Parable of the Tares as the Proof Text for Religious Liberty to the End of the Sixteenth Century,” Church History, I (1932), 67–89.Google Scholar

¹⁶ The Bloody Tenent yet more Bloody, 118.Google Scholar

¹⁷ On the Anabaptists, see Bainton, Roland H., “David Joris, Wiedertäufer und Kämpfer für Toleranz im 16. Jahrhundert,” ia Archiv für Religionsgeschichte (Leipzig, 1937), 8.Google Scholar

¹⁸ The question of a possible separation from the Church of England was, of course, of the greatest importance for the Puritans in seventeenth century Massachusetts. But for us who try to interpret Roger Williams's religious outlook, it appears only as a by-product of his fundamental concept of the Church.

¹⁹ Church History, 1, 68Google Scholar

²⁰ Letter of John Cotton and Roger Williams' Reply, 19Google Scholar

²¹ Cotton, John, Of the Holiness of Church Members, (London, 1650), 29.Google ScholarRutherford, Samuel, The Due right of Presbyteries or a Peaceable Plea for the Government of the Church of Scotland … (London, 1644), passim.Google Scholar

²² Cotton, John, Of the Holiness of Church Members, 65Google Scholar

²³ The Social Teaching of the Christian Churches (New York, 1931), II, 597.Google Scholar

²⁴ The Bloody Tenent washed 13Google Scholar

²⁵ The Bloody Tenent yet more Bloody, 80Google Scholar

²⁶ Exchange of Letters between Cromwell, Oliver and Cotton, John, in Hutchinson Papers (1679), 233–37.Google Scholar

²⁷ See Hutchinson, , The History of the Colony of Massachusetts-Bay (2 volumes, London, 1760)Google Scholar; we quote from the edition of 1936 by Mayo, Lawrence Shaw (Cambridge, Mass.), IGoogle Scholar, Appendix III.

²⁸ First ed., 1576; see edition 1608, 961. There exists an English translation of 1606 by Richard Knolles. See Baudrillart, Henry, Jean Boain et son temps (Paris, 1853).Google Scholar

²⁹ Weill, G., Les théories sur le pourvoir royal en France pendant les guerres de religion (Paris, 1901.).Google Scholar

³⁰ On Bodin see Allen, I. W., The History of Political Thought in the Sixteenth Century (New York, 1928), 44Google Scholar, where he points out that Bodin's influence on England in the seventeenth century was very important: See also Mattern, Johannes, Conception of the State (Baltimofe-Oxford, 1928), 7–8.Google Scholar

³¹ In A Model of Church and Civil Power, a pamphlet published by Roger Williams as second part of the Blooay Tenent of Persecution, the author or authors also quote Bodin, , p. 224.Google Scholar The authorship of this tract is problematic. Caldwell, Samuel L., the editor of the Bloody Tenent of PersecutionGoogle Scholar for the Narragansett Club believes that several authors are responsible for it whilst James Ernst mentions Richard Mather as author. Roger Williams had attributed it to John Cotton who, however, had denied the authorship.

³² The Bloody Tenent washed, 62Google Scholar

³³ Bodin, Jean, Les Six Livres de la République, 11Google Scholar; Williams, Roger, The Bloody Tenent of Persecution, 242Google Scholar; Ernst, James, The Political Thought of Roger Williams, 46Google Scholar does not mention Bodin in this connection.

³⁴ Bloody Tenent of Persecution, 180Google Scholar

³⁵ On Buchanan, see Gooch-Laski, , English Democratic Ideas in the 17th Century (Cambridge, 1929, 2nd. ed.), 39–41.Google Scholar Also Allen, , Political thought, 336–42.Google Scholar

³⁶ The Bloody Tenent of Persecution, 249Google Scholar

³⁷ The Bloody Tenent of Persecution, 378.Google Scholar

³⁸ See above, p. 43.

³⁹ It is interesting to note that a modern scholar came to a similar solution, in regard to our present religious situation. He found that Congregationalism was best prepared to combine “concepts of the church which transcend historie circumstances” and that it conforms best with the true spirit of Christianity which means: “The genius of Christianity is that it seeks to be in the world without being of the world.” See Bainton, Roland H., “Congregationalism; The Middle Way,” in Christendom, III (1940), 354.Google Scholar