Yale University Library

39002001853366

VIS • '

- 1 tkefat^ndisgef, a, &Ueg0rU iMffylbtL^

• YAILE-'VMVIEIRSinnr-

Hsgaaaiaffia

Bought with the income
ofthe
Society of the Cincinnati Fund
1113

This book was digitized by Microsoft Corporation in
cooperation with Yale University Library, 2008. You
may not reproduce this digitized copy of the book for
any purpose other than for scholarship, research,
educational, or, in limited quantity, personal use. You
may not distribute or provide access to this digitized copy
(or modified or partial versions of it) for commercial purposes.

SITE OF JOHN ROBINSON'S HOUSE, LEYDEN
(Occupied by house with arched door.)

**<SS|\ ^ft\

John Robinson

Ete pilgrim pastor

OZORA S. DAVIS

WITH AN INTRODUCTION BY
PROFESSOR WILLISTON WALKER

BOSTON
New York &fjg pilgrim Prf0S Chicago

Copyright, 1903
By Ozoba. S. Davis

TO PROFESSORS
CHESTER DAVID HARTRANFT
MELANCTHON WILLIAMS JACOBUS
and
WILLISTON WALKER
My Teachers in the Hartford Theological Seminary from
1S91 lo 1894

INTRODUCTION
Principles become attractive through their illus
tration in human lives ; and any movement, whether
religious or pohtical, which is founded on great
principles, is fortunate if it has a commanding per
sonality associated with its initiation. In a Wash
ington one sees embodied that which was noblest in
the American Revolution, and in a similar way a
Luther or a Wesley is typical and illustrative of the
great movements associated with their names. In
studying their lives we best understand the causes
for which they labored, and gain most of inspiration
for ourselves. Congregationalism has no one man
who stands so supreme in the story of its beginnings
as Wesley in those of Methodism or as Knox in the
leadership of the Scotch Reformation. It bears the
name of no single compelling leader as Lutheranism
does, for none of its founders stood in quite the rela
tionship to it that Luther bore to the German Refor
mation. But if it has had, thus, no one leader of
such conspicuous preeminence, Congregationalism
has had its founders, its martyrs and its exiles, to
whom it delights to pay its reverence; and of these
early worthies none was more attractive in his char
acter, more wide-reaching in his influence, or more
deserving of lasting remembrance, than John Robin
son. Several of the leaders of early Congregational-

vi INTRODUCTION
ism were men in whom allegiance to the truths for
which they , labored and sacrificed was associated
with intolerance and a considerable degree of unchar
itableness of judgment towards opponents, faults of
temper, largely explainable, indeed, by reason of the
strenuous and unequal contest in which they were
engaged and the bitterness of the opposition which
they encountered. One of the founders of Congre
gationalism, Robert Browne, made his peace with
the enemies of the principles for which he for a time
strenuously contended, and died repudiated by early
Congregationalists, who refused to be called by his
name or to be considered his disciples.
No such imperfections meet us in the character of
John Robinson. Broad-minded, charitable for his
age, far-visioned, he stood firmly for the truths for
which he endured exile, and yet thought charitably
and "kindly of those who differed from him in belief.
He was a strong, sweet, earnest, simple, brave, self-
sacrificing pastor. In him early Separatist Congre
gationalism appeared at its best, and in studying him
one sees revealed what was truest and noblest in its
principles. Nor is it simply the charm of his own
personal character that makes Robinson attractive
to the student of his career. He, beyond any other
leader of early Congregationalism, was the moulding
force in the training of the founders of Plymouth.
From the time when he first threw in his lot with the
Congregational worshipers at Scrooby, probably in

INTRODUCTION vii
1604, till the day on which he bade farewell to the
emigrants about to sail on the " Speedwell " for their
long voyage to the new world, his was the most
potent influence in the spiritual education of the
Pilgrim Church. A man of ripe scholarship, a grad
uate himself of the University of Cambridge, and a
respected, if humble, member of the community of
scholars gathered about the University at Leyden,
he. was well equipped to be the intellectual leader
of the company of which he was pastor. But his
moulding influence upon them was even more that
of the temper and the spirit than of the intellect, for
the personal qualities of Robinson became through
his example and teaching largely those of the Pil
grim congregation itself. To have been under his
ministry was, to such men as Bradford, a training in
firmness of purpose, in single-minded devotion to
truth, and, above all, in kindliness of feeling. In this
way he helped to make the story of the beginnings at
Plymouth one in which all lovers of New England
delight. Though Robinson never beheld the new land to
which he sent so large a part of the congregation that
he had guided and whither he himself earnestly de
sired to go, and though he died in the city of his
Dutch exile before the colony across the sea had fully
demonstrated its power to live in its new environ
ment, he was, as truly as any man who crossed the
Atlantic, one of the fathers of New England. One

viii INTRODUCTION
may justly say of him that if we reckon importance
by influence, by encouragement of associates, by the
spirit which he instilled into a great enterprise, no
other founder of the Pilgrim colony has higher claims
to grateful remembrance than this leader who never
set foot upon its soil. Others courageously executed
the task for which his patient ministry had done
much to fit them; and the inspiration to their en
deavor was largely his work. As such, whether
viewed from the standpoint of one interested in
the development of a branch of the Christian
Church, or of one investigating the beginnings of
American colonization and political life, the career
of John Robinson is of permanent significance.
Robinson's importance has long been recognized
by writers on the beginnings of New England or the
story of Congregationalism. His works were col
lected and printed and his life made the subject of a
brief biographical sketch by Robert Ashton.1 Dr.
Henry M. Dexter presented his portrait at consid
erable length in his monumental volume on the
beginnings of Congregationalism. 2 But not a little
remains for the patient gleaner in this field, and
Dr. Davis' investigations and discussions show in
how large a measure the life of this noble Congre
gational leader still may reward the study de-
1 " The Works of John Robinson." London. 1851.
2 " The Congregationalism of the last Three Hundred Years, as Seen
in its Literature." New York. 1880.

INTRODUCTION ix
voted to it, and is still fruitful in lessons of perman
ent value as inspiration for self-sacrificing Christian
consecration.
WILLISTON WALKER.

PREFACE
This study of a personality rich in significance to
the religious history of England and America has
been carried on in the midst of a pastorate, and has
formed for five years an avocation of increasing
profit and delight. It rests upon an investigation
of the sources in Robinson's preserved writings and
in available contemporary literature. The writer's
purpose has been to set the living man in true rela
tionship to his own time, and to estimate his real
contribution to the history of the church with which
his name is most closely associated.
It is not an easy task to vitalize a controversy
which has been dead for more than two centuries.
And it is difficult for us to realize the intensity with
which such a bygone issue could assert its para
mount importance to the mind of one who thought
and acted so long ago. We must awaken imagina
tion before we can set ourselves sympathetically into
the first quarter of the seventeenth century. The
writer sincerely hopes that he has not introduced so
many details that the imagination of any reader of
this biography will be clogged through their excess.
There are many events in the story of John Robin
son's life which we have been unable to rescue from
oblivion; yet the main lines along which his life
moved are clear. Behind all these controversies,
xi

xll PREFACE
now forgotten and dusty, is a real man. We have to
do with a character who struggles and grows. Many
specific details that concern dates and places are
obscure; the conflict and triumph of the living man
are plainly evident. This person we have sought to
bring forward into the light.
Without the assistance and encouragement of Rev.
W. H. Cobb, d.d., Librarian of the Congregational
Library in Boston, Massachusetts, and Professor
Williston Walker of Yale University, the work
never could have been completed. This debt the
writer gratefully acknowledges here. His heartiest
thanks are also extended to Mr. Herbert R. Gibbs
and Miss Sarah L. Patrick for their invaluable aid
in the preparation and publication of the manu
script. Nbwtonville, Massachusetts. July, 1903.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Chapter Pages
I The Anglican Reformation and its Results
in the Year 1606 .... 1
II Separatist Congregations in Gainsborough
and Scrooby ...... 39
III The Life of John Robinson until He Joins
the Separatist Congregation in Scrooby 52
IV The Emigration of the Scrooby Congregation
to Leyden and their Life there . . 79
V The Separation as Defined and Defended by
Robinson . ... 106
VI Settlement in Leyden . . . 131
VII The Champion of Calvinism . . . 146
VIII The Great Controversy Concerning Fellow
ship ... . .163
IX Church Polity in Leyden and Amsterdam 187
X Prosperous Years in Leyden . . 203

XI The Movement to America .
XII The So-Called "Farewell Address"
XIII The "Essays"
XIV The Last Years in Leyden .
XV The Man and His Place in History

22524126.5301
336

I
JOHN ROBINSON

CHAPTER I
THE ANGLICAN REFORMATION AND ITS RESULTS
IN THE YEAR 1606
In any effort to understand a person in history
two factors must be reckoned with. One of these
is the world in which the person lived. A child is
born into a social order; he comes into it bringing
with him positive tendencies which shape his char
acter and influence his choices. This inheritance
is a part of his environment. The whole sphere
in which he finds himself also acts upon his
choices, and enters into the entire process of his
growth. Hereditary tendencies and changing sur
roundings are necessary keys if we are to open
the doors which allow us to enter the secret
chambers of a person's soul. Something far more
important than these is necessary, however. When
one knows the ancestry and the times of Luther or
of Lincoln one is far from ready to attempt to
interpret the man to us. Every personality is
acted upon; but he acts. There is in him a mighty
energy of personal and peculiar force by means of
which he impresses himself upon his time. This
mighty fact of the free spirit of man, which often

4 JOHN ROBINSON
defies all the laws of heredity and environment, so
far at least as they have yet been framed, is the
supreme factor in the effort to understand a per
son. The last detail in regard to the inherited
traits of John Robinson might be known ; the
conditions of life and thought in that far-away
time when he lived might be comprehended; and
still we might be far from an adequate understand
ing of the man himself. We should still need to
enter into the motives which he shaped for himself
to control his action. We should require an insight
into the ideals toward the realization of which he
strove. We should need to see the real man acting
upon his time with something which seems almost
like creative energy.
To reach this deepest-hidden but most impor
tant factor the necessary way of approach is
through intimate knowledge of the world in which
he lived, as acting upon him and acted upon by
him. The first task before us, therefore, is to
attempt to set the life of John Robinson, who is
commonly known as the "Pastor of the Pilgrim
Fathers," closely into its vital connection with the
movements of religious thought and action in
England and Holland between the years 1575 and
1625. This will not be so difficult or complex an
effort as might seem at first thought. Robinson's

THE ANGLICAN REFORMATION 5
life was bound up very closely with one religious
movement. He was absorbed in one line of activ
ity. He lived in the radical movements of the
Anglican Reformation.
We must sketch briefly, then, the growth of the
Protestant Reformation in England until the acces
sion of King James I, in 1603, and also outline the
general plan of organization assumed by the Church
of England when the policy of this king had become
fixed, say in the year 1606.
England was peculiarly adapted to the spread
of the Protestant movement. The claims of Rome
had never been so thoroughly acknowledged in the
island kingdom as they had been on the continent.
The Bible had been translated early, and was read
extensively both in churches and among the com
mon people. The English, too, were by nature
peculiarly loyal to their monarch in the matter of
all claims which he might make for freedom from
external authority. When King Henry VIII in
herited the kingdom which his father had organ
ized with consummate skill in the interests of
absolutism, he found everything at the feet of the
crown except the Church. The reorganization
of the Church which was effected during his reign
was really made possible by this independent
temper of the English people. And the Act

6 JOHN ROBINSON
of Supremacy, passed in November, 1534, by
which the king was declared to be " the only
supreme head in earth of the Church of Eng
land, called Anglicana Ecclesia, " 1 did not
involve any radical changes in doctrine or deeply
concern the Roman Catholic subjects in the king's
realm. For Henry VIII could not be called a
Protestant. He won his title "Defender of the
Faith" by an attack on Luther. It is a rather
grim commentary on the general inconsistency of
the situation that, by the royal sanction, Protes
tants who denied Roman Catholic doctrine-, and
Roman Catholics who denied the royal supremacy
were burned or hanged at the same time. The Six
Articles, passed, after a discussion in which the
king himself participated, by Convocation and
Parliament in 1539, sanctioned the doctrine of
transubstantiation; declared that communion in
both bread and wine is not necessary to all per
sons; affirmed that priests might not marry; that
vows of chastity and widowhood must be observed ;
that private masses were to be continued ; and that
auricular confession was expedient and necessary.
So far as there was a party -whose policy was
to advance still farther along lines of Protestant
1 The Act is in Gee and Hardy, ' ' Documents Illustrative of English
Church History," London, Macmillan, 1896, pp. 243,244. I shall cite
his collection hereafter as "G. & H. "

THE ANGLICAN REFORMATION 7
doctrine, it was not permanently successful in its
efforts under the leadership of Thomas Cromwell.
But on the accession of King Edward VI (1547-
1553), the Protestant movement found a larger
possibility for supremacy opening before it. An
Act was passed January 21, 1549, in which the
use of a book of Common Prayer was prescribed
for the whole realm. J This secured uniformity in
respect to a book. The form enjoined was
modeled more closely after those used in Sarum
than according to any other use. It was a most
important event for the history of the Anglican
Church, 2 and marks the growth of Protestant
influences in its development. These influences
were exerted not only in the direction of polity,
but also upon the formal doctrine of the Church.
This deliberate attempt to get rid of obnoxious
Roman Catholic doctrine was persistent from the
time of the death of King Henry VIII. 3 In a
Second Act4 of Uniformity in 1552, a changed
form of Common Prayer was imposed upon the
people. This act also prescribed penalties against
1 See G. & H. pp. 358 ff.
2 See Wakeman, "An Introduction to the History of the Church of
.England. " Rivington, London, 1897, p. 274 ff.
s "The Condition of Morals and Religious Belief in the Reign of Ed
ward VI. " By the Rev. Nicholas Pocock. English Historical Review.
July, 1895, pp. 417-445.
4 G. & H.. 369 ff.

8 JOHN ROBINSON
all laymen who should refuse to attend services
at which the form was used. Thus action against
recusants began.
Under the lead of Cranmer, meantime, a con
fession of faith, catechism and primer were being
compiled. Forty- two articles of faith were pub
lished by royal authority in 1553. These subse
quently became the Thirty-Nine Articles of the
Anglican Church.
All these changes, however, rested upon most
insecure foundations. The mass of the people were
not ready for any radical alterations in the doc
trine or polity of the Church, and when King Ed
ward VI was succeeded by Queen Mary in 1553,
an intense Roman Catholic reaction was brought
about quite easily. The first proclamation of the
queen, published August 18, 1553, * announced the
faith which she held, and expressed the wish,
which every one knew was her will, that her
loving subjects should quietly embrace it. This
proclamation was quickly followed by her first
Act of Repeal, 2 in which acts passed during the
reign of King Edward VI were repealed, and the
religious constitution of the realm was practically
restored to that obtaining when King Henry VIII
died in 1547.
¦G. &H.,p. 373 ff. 2 Ibid., p. 377 ff.

THE ANGLICAN REFORMATION 9
But the queen did not pause here. Late in 1554
her second Act of Repeal 1 was passed. This
restored the ecclesiastical conditions of the year
1529. England was a Roman Catholic country.
Protestant heretics were exiled, imprisoned and
executed. It seems very unlikely that there were
any congregations organized according to the
model of King Edward VI, which maintained
their existence in England secretly during the
reign of Queen Mary. The line of development
which we must follow is to be taken up in those
cities of the continent to which the Protestant
leaders and members of their congregations fled
during the Roman Catholic reaction effected by
the queen.
Following out this line of development, we find
ourselves concerned with the action of one of these
congregations which was composed of families
who settled at Frankfort-on-the-Main in 1554.
They were using in their worship the Prayer-Rook
of King Edward VI, but did not adhere strictly
to all its requirements. They used no surplice,
dispensed with the litany, and allowed the people
to make no responses after the minister. For
this they were taken to task by their English breth-
>G. &H..D. 385 ff.

10 JOHN ROBINSON
ren settled in Swiss cities, and they defended their
practice by claiming that x these omissions and
changes were exactly in line with those which had
been intended by the leaders of the reform move
ments in England during the reign of King Ed
ward VI, but had been cut short by the changes
which came with the accession of Queen Mary.
The movement perpetuated by these English exiles
in continental cities, therefore, represented the nat
ural development of the Anglican reformation
toward a simpler form of worship and greater
freedom from Roman Catholic doctrine.
Queen Mary died in 1558. Princess Elizabeth
came to the throne. The exiles returned. Again
the form of the national religion underwent a
change. Queen Elizabeth was conservative and
the key-note of her policy was compromise. She
desired to be the head of a national church, which
should be neither so Protestant as to repel her
Roman Catholic subjects, nor so Roman Catholic
that her Protestant subjects would separate from
it. Therefore, according to her instructions, the
severe language against the pope was stricken out
of the litany, and certain vestments which had
1 The correspondence and an account of the entire trouble is contained
in "A Brieff Discours off the troubles begonne at Franckford in Germany
Anno Domini 1554. " 1575, p. xxi. Copy in Congregational Library,
Boston. Reprint, London, 1846, p. xxi.

THE ANGLICAN REFORMATION 11
been abandoned during the reign of King Edward
were restored. :
Queen Elizabeth's Supremacy Act, 2 passed in
January, 1559, repealed the Act of Repeal of
Queen Mary, and revived a part of the acts of
King Henry VIII and King Edward VI relating
to the religious condition of the realm. Im
mediately after the above came the stringent Act
of Uniformity, which restored the Book of
Common Prayer, changed slightly from the form
in which it had been fixed under King Edward
VI. The terms of this act were very strict
regarding the use of the Book, attendance at
church, and the penalties attending any trans
gression of the statute. 3 The Prayer-Book was
accepted by the majority of the queen's bishops,
not because they all thoroughly approved of it as
it then was, but for what a part of them hoped to
make of it by future changes.
Queen Elizabeth had no sympathy with the
type of Calvinism which had been brought home
by the exiles from the cities of the continent. She
was ready to use their counsel, but she did not
propose that these Protestants should carry out
the policy which they had endeavored to realize
1 Elizabeth retained the crucifix in her chapel and the use of the cope
was continued. This scandalized especially the returned exiles. See
Wakeman, pp. 329-333.
8 G. & H.,pp. 442-458. 3 These are specified in G. & H., p. 459.

12 JOHN ROBINSON
at home under King Edward VI, and which they
had perpetuated and intensified during their en
forced residence in the centers of Protestant thought
abroad. Her policy mediated between these
Protestants on the one hand and the leaders of her
Roman Catholic subjects on the other.
This policy of the queen found its ardent sup
porters among those who had been loyal to the
general cause of the Reformation in England.
They formed the Anglican party. On the other
hand were those who desired to press forward to
still greater reforms both in the doctrine and in
the practice of the church. They desired to
purify public worship of all the ceremonies which,
to them, stood for obnoxious Romish doctrines,
of which they were supposed to be rid already.
They strove for the elevation in moral character
of the clergy and members of the national Church.
For this they were named Puritans. The root
of this Puritan movement was ethical, not doc
trinal. Nothing could be farther from the truth
than to imagine that the English Puritans or their
Separatist successors were malcontents and incor-
rigibles, who found it by nature impossible to
abide in the same spiritual household with other
men. They were champions of righteousness and
men of intense ethical earnestness. This was the

THE ANGLICAN REFORMATION 13
prime motive in all their activity. Puritanism
was practical, not doctrinal, so far as its initial
incentives were concerned. It found a buttress
in the theology of Calvin, but it sprang from the
ethical passion for a purer life. *
The movement which is thus named Puritanism
has always been at work in the Church. It man
ifested itself in the Netherlands before it did in
England. Bishop Hooper, who "scrupled" the
vestments in the reign of King Edward, was the
father of Puritanism in England. But the clear
definition of the movement came chiefly from
the writings of Thomas Cartwright, Professor in
the University of Cambridge, from which position
he was ejected in 1571 for so-called erroneous
teaching. Cartwright was a follower of Calvin both in
doctrine and in polity. His teaching stood in
positive opposition to that of the Anglican party.
He held that the State and the Church are inde
pendent in administration; that the Scriptures
teach an authoritative system of polity, of which
the diocesan episcopate forms no part; that the
members of the Church ought to have a share in
the selection of their officers. The membership
1 See "Puritanism in the Old World and in the New," by J. Gregory,
1896, p. 2.

14 JOHN ROBINSON
of the Church, he taught, is composed of all bap
tized persons who are not excommunicated, and
the duty of the ministry is to train this body of
church members to holiness of life. He believed
that the magistrate ought to suppress heresy and
compel uniformity in worship. The true reformer,
he maintained, must remain within the Church,
work there for its purification, and never separate
from its communion. Separation he held to be a
grievous sin. Cartwright was the founder of the
party of Presbyterian Puritanism, between which
and the Anglican party there was sharp stress
throughout the reign of Queen Elizabeth.
Under the strain of this contention each party
intensified its emphasis upon its peculiar doctrines.
The great opponent of Cartwright, Archbishop
Whitgift, sought to maintain simply that episco
pacy is the more ancient and desirable form of
church government. In 1589, Bancroft main
tained that episcopacy is of divine authority, and
in 1593 Bilson asserted that episcopacy and apos
tolic succession are essential to the very existence
of the Church. Thus the breach widened. Even
the gradual passing away of the common foe,
Roman Catholicism, seemed to intensify the strife
between Puritan and Anglican. 1
1 See Williston Walker "A History of the Congregational Churches in
the United States," 1894, pp. 19-24.

THE ANGLICAN REFORMATION 15
Puritanism, as outlined by Cartwright, had
within itself certain unfulfilled conditions which
were inevitably bound to carry some of its fol
lowers to the extent of separation from the national
church as established by law. It was a policy of
ethical and ecclesiastical reformation. This refor
mation, according to Cartwright, was bound up
with the civil power, and it was necessary to wait
for the initiative of the civil magistrates in under
taking practical reform. The reformer is by
nature a man impulsive in purpose and impatient
of delay. The end which he seeks seems to him
so righteous and so necessary that he cannot con
trol his zeal while he waits for the slow operation
of the elaborate machinery of civil administration.
The time was bound to come when men of this
stamp would face the question, Has the Anglican
Church the power resident within it to reform the
abuses which are involved in its present constitu
tion? If the answer to that question were a neg
ative, a second question was bound also to arise :
Is it, then, the duty of those who hold fast to the
holy character of the members of the true Church
to remain in the communion of the Church of Eng
land? Cartwright 's teaching became a school in
which men were trained to advance beyond their
teacher. He opened a door which other men

16 JOHN ROBINSON
entered who believed him inconsistent because he
did not go to the full length of separation.
The first attempt to outline the theory and prac
tice of a separation from the Anglican Church is
found in the writings and the work of Robert
Browne. It was while pastor of a church of Puri
tan tendencies in Cambridge, about 1580, that he
seems to have become convinced that the Puritan
reformation was not thorough enough, and that
a more radical change, without waiting longer for
help either from the impotent and unwilling mag
istrates or from the sad minority of faithful clergy,
was the sole means of purifying the Church and of
avoiding personal sin. He maintained not only
that the order of the Anglican Church was unscrip-
tural, but also that the bishops in sustaining it
were guilty of sin. This sin became, by partici
pation, the personal sin of every person who re
mained in the false church, and therefore church
relationship was a determining factor in holiness
and salvation. To remain a member of the Church
of England was to connive at sin and become in
volved in it. Separation was necessar}' in order
to salvation. J
From two small books issued by Browne we
1 See Dexter," The Congregationalism of the Last Three Hundred Years,
as Seen in its Literature," New York, Harper, 1880, pp. 61-128, for
the best available study of Browne's work.

THE ANGLICAN REFORMATION 17
gain an outline of his teaching, which may be gath
ered up under three heads:
I. A Christian church is a company of persons
possessing Christian character, and united to God
and to one another in the bonds of a covenant.
To every such church belong all the powers nec
essary for self-organization, government and dis
cipline. Such a church is a democracy, under the
supreme and immediate headship of Christ, and
each member is responsible to Christ for the welfare
of the church to which he belongs.
II. But each church is also bound to its sister
churches, and is to give and receive aid and counsel
whenever these are needed.
III. The Church and the State are independent
of each other, and therefore civil magistrates have
no right to exercise lordship in spiritual affairs.
These doctrines were so radical that they called
out a proclamation in the name of Queen Eliza
beth against the books, the possession and circu
lation of which was so serious a charge that two
men convicted of it were executed in 1583.
It remained to be seen whether Browne was a
man of sufficient strength to organize an institu
tion which could successfully realize his ideal.
Great dangers were bound up with propositions
so radical as those which Browne announced.

18 JOHN ROBINSON
The true test of his capacity as a leader came when
he endeavored to form a congregation upon the
basis of those principles. He made the attempt
at Middelberg. Disaster attended it. This may
not have been due entirely to the inability of
Browne himself to control his church. In a
company where each man is made the responsible
censor of his brother's opinion and conduct the
peril is great. Poor human nature is too weak to
endure such a strain as that unless there is a mas
terful personality in control, to temper men's judg
ments and set a high example of kindness. The
principles of Separation called for wise leadership.
Browne 's congregation went to wreck and he him
self, a man of no small ability, and a preacher of
far more than ordinary power, was incompetent
to control his congregations, even if they had been
organized on a model which had less possibility
and peril of disruption bound up within it. He
finally returned into the communion of the Church
of England, and died, an old man, scorned by Puri
tans and Anglicans alike.
The teachings of Browne were widely circulated.
When, in 1610, Joseph Hall wrote in reply to John
Robinson, who had claimed that the main posi
tions of the Separatists were not well or commonly
known, he said, —

THE ANGLICAN REFORMATION 19
" What Cobler or Spinster hath not heard of
the maine" holds of Brownisme?"1
Thus early Browne 's name was given in derision
to those who advocated a Separation. They tried
in vain to shake it off, but it continued many years
as a term of reproach. 2
The second stage in the development of Sepa
ration may also be designated by the name of a
man. Barrowism is the general name given to the
teachings of Henry Barrow and John Greenwood.
After the year 1586 both of these men came into
prominence on account of their arrest and repeated
examination for ecclesiastical misdemeanors. Dur
ing their subsequent imprisonment in the Gate
house and Clink prisons they managed to prepare
and smuggle out enough manuscript to fill over
nine hundred pages of exegetical and controver
sial literature. In these books a new statement
of the Separatist principle appears.
Barrow and his friends agreed fully with Browne
in his attack upon the Anglican Church' in respect
to the character of its members, its polity and
its worship. The duty of Separation was made
1 Joseph Hall, ' 'A Common Apologie of the Church of England, " 1610,
p. 5.
2 See the popular conception mirrored in the writings of Shakespeare.
"I had as lief be a Brownist as a politician. "
—Twelfth Night, iii, 2, 34.

20 JOHN ROBINSON
equally imperative. The difference between
Browne and Barrow lay in the positive side of
their teaching concerning the nature of the true
church. 1 The general tendency in the teaching
of Robert Browne was democratic. The theories
of Barrow must be judged, not only according
to the language in which he writes, but also by
the practical character of the congregation in Am
sterdam which was built upon these teachings.
And, while it is not a true judgment which pro
nounces Henry Barrow aristocratic rather than
democratic, without qualification of those terms,
it is right to say that the church order which his
teaching inspired laid hold of that strong aristo
cratic tendency which appears in his teaching, and
carried it to its logical conclusion in a church
whose government was centered in the hands of the
church officers. Barrow taught that the members
of the church ought to be a " humble, meek, obedi
ent and loving people" toward their true govern
ors, the officers of the church. The body of the_
congregation, having within itself all the powers
necessary for its organization and control, is there-
1 See "Henry Barrow, Separatist, and the Exiled Church of Amster
dam," by Fred. J. Powicke, Ph.D., London, James Clarke & Co., 1900,
for an extensive monograph in which Barrow's work is examined very
thoroughly, and the common judgment as to his aristocratic view of the
church is rejected.

THE ANGLICAN REFORMATION 21
fore brought into contrast with the body of the
elders, who hold their office indeed as a trust from
the congregation, but are, nevertheless, in a real
sense the church.
On the practical side Barrowism presented the
same difficulties that were such a menace in the
teachings of Browne. The element of religious
espionage in the system was the prophecy of its
ultimate failure unless there should be the counter
acting force of sane personal leadership in the
church built upon these principles. A church was
gathered in London, organized with Francis John
son as its pastor in 1592, and had a stormy history,
both in England and in Holland. In London they
were the objects of intense persecution from which
they finally fled to Amsterdam. For clearness in
description this congregation is generally described
as the "Ancient London Church." The story of
their trials in Holland is pathetic. We shall meet
them later there. 1
Thus we have outlined the growth of the radi
cal wing of the Puritan movement into the Separa
tion, on the constructive side of which we find a
fundamental difference in church theory between
democracy and aristocracy. We shall take up this
movement later when we turn to the history of a
1 See Dexter, "Congregationalism as Seen," etc., Lecture V.

22 JOHN ROBINSON
Separatist congregation which was gathered near
Scrooby early in the seventeenth century.
Throughout the reign of Queen Elizabeth the
strife betweeen Anglican and Puritan went on.
The hopes of the latter had been set upon the suc
cessor to the queen, James of Scotland, who came
to the throne in 1603. On his way from Scotland
to London he was met by a petition, called, from
the supposed number of signatures which it bore,
the Millenary Petition. 2 The signers of this peti
tion were " the ministers of the gospel in this
land, neither as factious men affecting a popular
parity in the Church, nor as schismatics aiming at
the dissolution of the State eccleciastical, but as
the faithful servants of Christ and loyal subjects
to your majesty, desiring and longing for the
redress of divers abuses of the Church."
The petition, therefore, did not come from Brown
ists with a dangerous tendency toward democracy
in their doctrine, nor from Separatists with the
direful trend toward Separation in their practice.
It represented the conforming Puritans. The scope
of their "humble suit" was that these offensive
things, among others named, might be removed
or changed: the cross in baptism; confirmation;
use of the cap and surplice; " longsomeness of
1 Copy in G. & H., pp. 508 ff .

THE ANGLICAN REFORMATION 23
service"; profanation of the Lord's Day; the
use of the ring in marriage; bowing at the name
of Jesus. They also begged that no popish doc
trine be taught; that only men able to preach be
made ministers; that non-residency of ministers
be no longer permitted. They urged reforms in
the matter of administering the pastoral office,
particularly regarding plural benefices and fees.
And they pleaded for a juster exercise of the func
tions of church discipline.
The petitioners declared themselves ready to
show that the abuses mentioned were contrary
to the Scriptures, either in writing, or at a confer
ence to be called by the king.
The king called the Hampton Court Conference
at once to meet in January, 1604, for the purpose
of consulting in regard to religious changes in the
nation. The result of its deliberations was to
convince the Puritan party that absolutely noth
ing favorable to its policy was to be expected at
the hands of the new king. His temper became
violent under the pressure of the Puritan conten
tion. The Hampton Court Conference was deci
sive for the hopes of all those ministers who might
be still of the belief that the true method of reform
was to remain loyal members of the Church of
England. The tendency of such a decision would

24 JOHN ROBINSON
be either to crush such ministers back into con
formity, or to drive them farther forward into open
Separation. Another act in the definition of church order
and the royal policy was the results reached by the
Convocations of 1603-4. These assemblies, con
vened by royal warrant, in both Canterbury and
York provinces, enacted the canons of 1604, in
which we have a clear outline of the order of a
state church prescribed for the whole realm and
sanctioned by the king.
Thus the first year of the reign of King James
was a year of definition. Anglican, Puritan and
Separatist alike knew what to expect. The more
zealous and earnest Puritans could not feed their
hearts on false hopes any longer. Separation was
bound to come easier under such conditions.
Let us at this point, therefore, take a brief survey
of the church organization which had been sanc
tioned by Church and king in the Convocation of
1603-4, in order that we may clearly see the eccle
siastical system from which the Separation was
made. Only a very brief and general outline can
be presented here, but the fundamental princi
ples in the Anglican polity are clearly displayed
in these enactments. The title of the book is,
"Constitutions and Canons Ecclesiastical!, Treated

THE ANGLICAN REFORMATION, 25
upon by the Bishop of London/' etc., 1604.
The canons number in all one hundred and
forty-one, of which twelve are devoted to the
Church of England, eighteen to the service and
sacraments, forty-six to ministers, and thirty-six
to the ecclesiastical courts. The remainder are
devoted to miscellaneous matters.
We will now attempt from these sources to con
struct the general system of the established church
order from which the Separatists went out.
The center of the entire system is the royal
supremacy in all matters ecclesiastical as well
as civil. At least four times each year all preach
ers, ministers and lecturers are to teach plainly
that all authority in religious and civil matters
claimed by any other person than the king is abol
ished, and that the sovereign's power in the realm
is the highest under God's. The royal authority
is supreme in every department of the kingdom.
The Church of England as established by law in
the realm by these canons is a true Church. The
test of the true character of the Church is made
by applying to it the question, Does it maintain
and teach the doctrines of the apostles? The
Church of England does this, and is therefore a
true Church. Any one who denies this fact is con
demned to excommunication and can be restored

26 JOHN ROBINSON
only by the archbishop, after repentance and the
public revocation of his error by the guilty party.
Since the Church of England is the true Church,
separation from it is defined as follows : —
"Whosoever shall hereafter separate them
selves from the communion of saints, as it is ap
proved by the Apostles' rules in the Church of
England, and combine themselves together in a
new brotherhood, accounting the Christians who
are conformable to the doctrine, government,
rites and ceremonies of the Church of England,
to be profane and unmeet for them to join within
Christian profession, let them be excommunicated."
Ministers who refuse "subscription" are denied
the right to take the name of any church not estab
lished by law, and whoever asserts that such min
isters have this right, or claim that the Church of
England is oppressing any such forbidden church,
is liable to excommunication.
For doctrine, the Thirty-Nine Articles, agreed
upon in 1552, form the authoritative creed of the
Church. Excommunication is the penalty pre
scribed for any one who should affirm that these
Articles are in any particular superstitious or erro
neous. The government of the Church in general is
administered, under the king, by archbishops,
bishops, etc. To affirm that this system is in any

THE ANGLICAN REFORMATION 27
way repugnant to the Word of God, or to deny the
validity of the forms used in the consecration of
bishops, priests and deacons, renders the person
making the affirmation or denial liable to excom
munication. The Church of England is divided into two
provinces, at the head of each of which is an arch
bishop. The Archbishop of Canterbury is the
Primate of all England. Next to him is the
Archbishop of York.
The second division is the diocese, at the head
of which is the bishop, who, in the controversies
of the times, is often called the "ordinary." The
cathedral church of the diocese is the one containing
the bishop 's throne. The duties of the bishops and
other church officers are outlined clearly. One
of the special abuses recognized by the Convoca
tions is the failure of ministers to reside in their
parishes. This is taken up and the practice for
bidden. The unit of organization in the Church of Eng
land is the parish, of which all baptized persons
who are not suspended or excommunicated are
members by virtue of their baptism. At the head
of the parish is the minister or priest, assisted, if
necessary, by one or more curates, who have been
ordained either deacons or priests. Upon the

28 JOHN ROBINSON
office and work of the ministry the burden of
emphasis in the canons is laid. This forms so
large a theme in the arguments and attacks of the
Separatists, that we must look at the matter
somewhat in detail.
No person is permitted to become a candidate
for sacred orders unless he shall be at least twenty-
three years old for a deacon, and twenty-four for
a priest. He must also be able to show the bishop
at the time of his ordination that he has a position
in the Church ready for him, or that he is in some
way provided for. The exception to this rule is
Masters of Arts of five years' standing, living at
their own expense, or men whom the bishops
are sure that they can soon appoint to livings.
Furthermore, the candidate must be a resident
of the diocese of the bishop who is to ordain him,
or else must bring letters from the bishop of the
diocese to which he belongs. Either he must have
taken a degree at Oxford or Cambridge, or else
he must be able to give an account of his faith in
Latin and to defend it from the Scriptures. The
moral character of the candidate must be vouched
for under the seal of Oxford or Cambridge, or by
three or four ministers and other persons who
have known him for a space of at least three years.
Before he can be ordained, he must be rigidly

THE ANGLICAN REFORMATION 29
examined in the presence of the bishop and the
assisting ministers, who must be from the candi
date's cathedral church, if possible, and if not,
from among the preachers of the same diocese.
Certainly it would seem as if the safeguards
thrown around the matter of sacred orders were
sufficient, according to these canons, to secure for
the ministry of the Church men of ability and
character. The only loophole through which
either ignorant or bad men could slip in would be
the failure of the bishops to hold rigidly to the
strenuous requirements of the canons. Doubtless
this was sometimes the case, "for the canons pre
scribe penalties for those bishops who ordain men
for whom there seems to be no prospect of prefer
ment, or who fail to make the necessary exami
nations. It will be necessary for us to recall these canons
when we come to consider the attack of the Sepa
ratists upon the ministry of the Anglican Church.
The canons also carefully safeguard the matter
of preferment and the episcopal sanction of min
isters. No minister is allowed to pass from one
diocese to another and be instituted over a church
in the latter, unless he can show the bishop of the
new diocese his orders, and give evidence of a good
life and pass an examination if required. No man

30 JOHN ROBINSON
is to serve as a curate or minister without exam
ination and approval by the bishop or his deputy.
Nor is one man permitted to serve more than one
church or chapel in one day, unless the chapel is
united to the parish church or the bishops have
decided that the second church or chapel is unable
to sustain a curate.
The work of the ministry covers the general
spiritual interests of the parish. But the canons
devote special attention to the matter of preach
ing. This is without doubt inspired by the Puritan
attack on this point. A difference is recognized
between ministers who are able to preach and
those who are not, and special provision is made
for the parishes of the latter. Every beneficed
preacher is required, either in his own or a neigh
boring parish, to preach one sermon every Sunday,
and in this sermon he is required to " sober!}? and
sincerely divide the Word of truth to the glory of
God and to the best edification of the people."
If a man in a benefice is not able to preach, how
ever, he is required to provide that sermons shall
be preached in his parish at least once a month
by preachers lawfully commissioned to perform
this service. But it is left to the judgment of the
bishop to decide whether or not the living of such
a minister will bear the cost of such a supply of a

THE ANGLICAN REFORMATION 31
preacher as is specified above. Here again we
note the way in which the administration of the
canons rests with the bishops, and must not infer
too quickly that, because the canons make these
provisions for preaching, the prescriptions were
faithfully carried out by the bishops. It is further
enjoined that every Sunday when there is no ser
mon preached, the minister or the curate shall read
some one of the prescribed homilies. A minister
who cannot preach is also forbidden to attempt
to expound the Scriptures. No preacher is
allowed to preach without showing his license, and
the test of his doctrinal soundness is the Scriptures,
the Articles of Religion and the Prayer-Book.
Every sermon is to be recorded in a book at the
church' where it is preached, and the names of the
preacher and licensing bishop are required for the
record. No preacher is allowed to oppose any doc
trine delivered by any other preacher in the same
or a neighboring church without the consent of
the bishop. Failure to conform to the require
ments of the Prayer-Book is to be punished by
forfeiture of the license to preach.
Every preacher with a benefice, even if he have
a curate, is required to read service and admin
ister the sacraments, at least twice yearly in his
parish church. It is strictly forbidden to preach

32 JOHN ROBINSON
or to administer the sacraments in private houses,
except in cases of the feebleness or the dangerous
illness of the inmates. By a private house is
meant a house in which there is no legally dedicated
chapel. In case a chapel is connected with a house
the chaplain is forbidden to administer the sacra
ments except in the chapel, and then only seldom,
in order that the owners of the house may par
take of the communion more often in the church.
Inasmuch as some persons had refused to have
their children christened, or to take the communion
when the minister was not a preacher, a canon
charges such persons to cease this refusal upon
pain of excommunication, "as though the virtue
of those sacraments did depend upon this [the min
ister's] ability to preach."
The other duties prescribed for the ministry
are those which naturally belong to the office, such
as christening, which must be according to the
rules of the Prayer-Book ; burial of the dead, which
is to be denied only to those excommunicated or
guilty of notorious crimes for which they did not
repent; catechizing; preparation of children for
confirmation by the bishop; the marriage of per
sons duly authorized; and visitation of the sick.
A significant canon, in view of the attack made
by the Separatists upon the moral character of

THE ANGLICAN REFORMATION 33
many of the Anglican ministers, has to do with
the regulation of the conduct of the clergy. The
very vices which we find charged against them by
John Robinson are here explicitly prohibited.
They are forbidden to resort to taverns or ale
houses, to drink or riot, to play at cards or dice.
They are commanded to live in honest study, to
exercise and not forsake their calling.
The final test to which every minister must sub
mit is subscription to certain articles of belief and
practice. Any minister coming into a diocese
must subscribe to these in the presence of the
bishop of the diocese before he may be permitted
to perform any of the duties of his office. The
thirty-sixth canon sums up so completely the rela
tion which the minister must bear to the church
in this matter of subscription, that we give it as
it stands: —
" No person shall hereafter be received into the
Ministry, nor either by Institution or Collation
admitted to any ecclesiastical living, nor suffered
to preach, to catechize, or to be a Lecturer, or
Reader of Divinity in either Universities, or in any
cathedral or collegiate Church, City, or Market
town, Parish Church, Chapel, or in any other
place within this Realm, except he be licensed
either by the Archbishop, or by the Bishop of the
diocese (where he is to be placed) under their

34 JOHN ROBINSON
hands and seals, or by one of the two Universities
under their seal likewise, and except he shall first
subscribe to these three Articles following, in such
manner and sort as we have here appointed: —
"I. That the King's Majesty, under God, is
the only supreme Governor of this Realm, and
of all other his Highness' Dominions and Coun
tries, as well in all spiritual or ecclesiastical things
or causes, as temporal. And that no foreign
Prince, Person, Prelate, State, or Potentate have
or ought to have any Jurisdiction, Power, Superi
ority, Preeminence, or Authority ecclesiastical or
spiritual within his Majesty's said Realms, Do
minions and Countries.
" II. That the Book of Common Prayer, and
of ordering of Bishops, Priests, and Deacons, con
taineth in it nothing contrary to the Word of God,
and that it may lawfully be used, and that he him
self will use the form in the said book prescribed
in public prayer and administration of the sacra
ments and none other.
" III. That he alloweth the books of Articles
of Religion agreed upon by the Archbishops and
Bishops of both provinces and the whole clergy
in the Convocation holden at London in the year
of our Lord God one thousand five hundred fifty
and two ; and that he acknowledgeth all and every
the articles therein contained, being in number
nine and thirty, besides the ratification, to be
agreeable to the Word of God.
"To these three articles, whoever will sub
scribe, he shall, for the avoiding of all ambigui-

THE ANGLICAN REFORMATION 35
ties, subscribe in this order and form of words,
setting down both his Christian and surname,
viz.: " / N. N. do willingly and ex animo subscribe to
these three articles above mentioned and to all things
that are contained in them."
This is the test of subscription, about which
contemporary writing is so full, and which proved
such a heavy burden to the Separatists. Every
bishop is strictly enjoined to see that rigid sub
scription is required from every minister of the
diocese, under severe penalty in case of any omis
sion. The test is to be constantly in force. If any
minister, after having subscribed to these three
articles, should fail to use all the forms of worship
as prescribed in the Prayer-Book, he is to be sus
pended from his office and given a month in which
to reform his ways. If at the end of that time
he does not submit to the requirements of the
Prayer-Book, he is to be excommunicated and
given one month more for reformation. If at the
end of this second month of probation he remains
obdurate, he is to be deposed from the ministry.
The canons proceed to take up the matter of
plurality of benefice, and seek to guard the church
from the danger which is involved in this plainly
recognized abuse. But the canons only prescribe
that ministers who are allowed to hold more than

36 JOHN ROBINSON
one living shall be men of excellent training and
ability as preachers; that the livings shall not be
more than thirty miles apart ; and that the minis
ters shall reside in each place a reasonable amount
of time each year.
The worship of the Church is covered by the
canons. There are two sacraments, baptism and
the Lord's Supper. One of the points which was
hotly debated when these canons were adopted was
the use of the sign of the cross in baptism. The
use of the sign is defended in a long argument of
little force, after which the sign is asserted to be
no essential part of the ceremony, which might be
equally perfect if the sign were not used. It is
employed as an accidental part of the sacrament
of baptism, and is so to be used by the Church.
The Lord's Supper is to be administered at
least three times each year, one of these occasions
being at Easter. And every layman is bound to
receive it thrice every year, ' ' under the penalty
and danger of the Law." In administering the
sacrament the minister is to partake first, and
the communicants are to receive both the bread
and the wine. Among those to be excluded from
the communion are persons known to be living
in notorious sin, persons at enmity with their
neighbors, and officers of the church who have

THE ANGLICAN REFORMATION 37
not presented for prosecution to their bishops
such offenders against the church as they are
bound by their oath to search out. Also those
who refuse to be present at public prayers accord
ing to the order of the Church of England, deprav
ers of the Prayer-Book, and persons denying the
validity of the ceremonies enjoined in the Prayer-
Book are to be excluded.
The Prayer-Book is given a place of supreme
importance in all the worship of the Church. To
assert that the forms which it prescribes are super
stitious, unlawful or inconsistent with the Scrip
tures, is sufficient ground for excommunication.
The ministers are held strictly to all its require
ments, without being allowed in the least to dimin
ish the force of its injunctions in their preaching,
or to add anything either to its form or matter.
So far as the Prayer-Book contains rites and cere
monies, these are obligatory upon every person.
To affirm that these ceremonies are wicked or
superstitious, or to claim that zealous and godly
men may not with good conscience approve, em
ploy and subscribe to them — this is sufficient war
rant for excommunication.
The proper clothing for church officers is de
scribed in the canons, from the garb of the arch
bishop to the dress of the poor curate. The sur-

38 JOHN ROBINSON
plice is to be worn by every minister while he
conducts service. It is to be made with sleeves
and provided at the expense of the parish. All
questions concerning vestments are to be decided
by the bishop or his deputy. Ministers who are
university graduates are commanded to wear
hoods according to their degrees. Ministers who
are not university graduates are allowed to wear
upon the surplice, " instead of hoods, some decent
tippet of black, so it be not silk. "
The sacred days of the Church are many. Be
sides Sunday, all the holidays announced in the
Prayer-Book must be observed. The litany is to
be said or sung, not only on these days, but upon
every Wednesday and Friday, whether these were
holidays or not.
This gives us, from the official Canons of the
Church, a fairly distinct picture of the organiza
tion to which conformity was required from every
minister by the law. To enforce this requirement
there was developed a system of judicial machinery
which became a tyranny. We do not need to
survey these courts before which those who refused
subscription suffered. Enough has been seen
already to show how strong the tests of conformity
were, and how easy it might be to become an eccle
siastical offender.

II
SEPARATIST CONGREGATIONS

CHAPTER II
SEPARATIST CONGREGATIONS IN GAINSBOROUGH
AND SCROOBY
It is not possible at present to trace with cer
tainty any line of causal connection between the
congregation or congregations formed about London
on the principles of the Separation and the organ
ization of similar companies in the north of Eng
land. They were both due to the earnest preach
ing of the Puritan ministers and their insistence
upon a holy life. This brought about a radical
change of character and begot a zeal for reforma
tion in their converts. When the possibility of
that reformation was thus sought by these men,
and when the simple model of church organiza
tion in the New Testament was studied, it appeared
to them that the government of the Church by
bishops and the use of the ceremonies prescribed
by the Prayer-Book were alike inconsistent with
the New Testament description of the Church.
They were, in each case, men who were seeking a
higher expression of the religious life, and they
came to the common conclusion that the expres-

42 JOHN ROBINSON
sion could not be realized through the church as
then constituted by law in England.
In the year 1849 Rev. Joseph Hunter for the
first time identified the exact region in which were
gathered the Separatist' congregations from which
the " Pilgrim Fathers" of America came. In
1854 the full results of his investigations were
published.1 He determined, from references in
the writings of Bradford, that the village of
Scrooby was the chief center of the movement, the
area of which is now quite specifically defined.
The general character of the district in which
these Separatist congregations were organized
would not seem at first to promise much in the
way of intellectual development. It was open
country, flat and uninteresting, with villages dot
ting the landscape here and there, and only a
scattered population. It was isolated from the
large cities. The Great North Road ran through
it; but this, Arber says, was "a mere horse track,
and not fenced in; so that the traveller needed a
guide, to prevent his wandering out of the way. " 2
In spite of all that one would naturally suppose
1 ' ' Collections concerning the Church or Congregation of Protestant
Separatists formed at Scrooby in North Nottinghamshire, in the time of
King James I : the Founders of New Plymouth, " by the Rev. Joseph
Hunter. London, 1854.
2 "Story of the Pilgrim Fathers," p. 51.

GAINSBOROUGH AND SCROOBY 43
to have been true concerning the ignorance of the
peasantry, the narrowness of their world, and their
indifference to the life of the spirit, there had been
a unique religious character about the district.
Previous to the Reformation there had been many
houses of the different religious bodies in the re
gion; nearly every monastic order was represented.
Many of the leading families there were ardent
Roman Catholics and suffered severe hardships
when the state religion was changed. Corre
sponding to this loyal support of the old faith by
the old aristocracy was a singular activity on
the part of the Puritan preachers, to which the
organizations in Gainsborough and Scrooby were
due. * The work of laymen was no less conspic
uous. Bradford tells how William Brewster's
great religious service to the country in which he
lived consisted both in his personal example of a
godly life and in the effort which he made to pro
cure good preachers in all the villages round about.
This was his practice before ever he had thought
of Separation. He was not the only earnest, high-
minded man in the region. The whole section
was good soil for the harvest of religious freedom.
It is a singular fact that the pioneers of the Eng
lish Baptists are Smyth and Helwisse of Gains-
1 See Hunter, "Collections, " pp. 24 ff.

44 JOHN ROBINSON
borough; that the Congregationalists are proud
to claim as the founders of their polity in its
modern form Robinson, Brewster and Bradford,
all of this district; that later, from the rectory at
Epworth, in this very region, went forth John and
Charles Wesley, the great leaders of the Methodist
movement. There must have been a local tem
per which made this possible. Arber 's attempt
to apply the "crass ignorance of the country
peasantry of England" to this district is unwar
ranted in the face of what has been done for true
religion by its inhabitants.
The protest of earnest preachers and zealous
laymen against the Anglican Church as established
by law involved them in trouble. After a time
they organized into churches. The first of these
organizations probably took place in the city of
Gainsborough, about the year 1602, and the later
leader of the movement and pastor of the church
was John Smyth. The sole authority for this
early date, however, is Secretary Morton in "New
England's Memorial." Bradford does not give
the date, and, in general, the author of the History
seems to have had little regard for the necessity
of definite chronology. He is not so much in
accurate as he is careless or inadequate. Prince

GAINSBOROUGH AND SCROOBY 45
followed Morton in regard to the date, and Hunter
and Dexter both seem inclined to accept it. 1
So far as it rests upon the official connection of
John Smyth with the congregation, the date 1602
is probably too early. Edward Arber seems to
have established the fact 2 that" John Smyth was
a conforming minister of the Church of England
in Lincoln on March 22, 1605. It was not until
after that date that we are to connect him with
the Separatist congregation at Gainsborough.
But this is not clear proof that the congregation
itself was not organized before that date, as Arber
stoutly claims it could not have been. 3 That
claim cannot be established until we are sure that
the organization of the congregation and the elec
tion of its officers were contemporary We shall
discover clear proof that there is a difference in
the Separatist theory between a church "gath
ered," that is, united in covenant, and a church
organized fully by the election of its officers. The
second stage was not necessary in order that a con
gregation might be called a "church." There
is no sufficient reason why Morton's date should
not be accepted as accurate for the organization
by covenant of this Separatist company.
1 So Dunning, "Congregationalists in America, " p. 72.
2 "Story of the Pilgrim Fathers," pp 133, 134.
'Ibid. D.,p. 48.

46 JOHN ROBINSON
John Smyth, a Cambridge man, became identi
fied with the congregation at some time following
the year 1602, and we generally connect his name
most closely with its fortunes in England and
Holland. Smyth decided for the Separation after
a period of nine months spent in study and doubt
over the question. His congregation was called
a company of "tradesmen" by their opponents.
He carried his ideas of the Separation to the farthest
extreme, and maintained that it was necessary
to withdraw, not only from all public worship or
communion with the Anglican Church, but even
from all acts of religious fellowship with its mem
bers, such as reading the Scriptures or joining in
private prayer.
Persecution swiftly followed the gathering of the
Gainsborough congregation and they were com
pelled to flee into Holland, which was the refuge
then for all who suffered for non-conformity in
England. The emigration was gradually effected,
and they reached Amsterdam in October or No
vember, 1606.
The second congregation probably never for
mally split off from the church at Gainsborough,
although at the beginning the two seem to have
been part of one movement. Scrooby is a little
village which was, at the close of the sixteenth

GAINSBOROUGH AND SCROOBY 47
century, one of the post stations on the Great
North Road from London to Berwick. After the
accession of King James I this road became more
important, owing to the necessity of frequent
communication between the two courts. Conse
quently the postmaster became a man of consid
erable local prominence and income. The office
in Scrooby was held by William Brewster from
April 1, 1590, to September 30, 1607.
Also in Scrooby there was a manor house be
longing to the Archbishop of York, which Arch
bishop Sandys had granted to his son Samuel,
under whom William Brewster, postmaster, held
it. We have observed already the practical char
acter of the religion of William Brewster. It was
natural that, when such a man became a Separatist,
he should open his house to his brethren and lend
his personal influence and activity to their cause.
This is exactly what he did. A new center was
formed in the old manor house at Scrooby. Doubt
less many who came to meet and worship there
had formerly gone the longer distance to Gainsbor
ough. Brewster entertained them when they came,
at no slight expense to himself, and continued his
practice as long as they remained in England.
The members of the congregation came from
the villages of Austerfield and Scrooby and from

48 JOHN ROBINSON
the adjacent country so far as there were isolated
houses. At the beginning they gathered on Sun
day for counsel, fellowship and, probably, for some
simple form of worship, walking to and from the
manor house and proving the hospitality of its
owner. This fellowship, however, grew naturally
to assume a form of organic union. The picture
which we have of the formation of the little church
comes from one of the later antagonists 1 of John
Robinson, who says : —
"Is this so strange to John Robinson? do we
not know the beginnings of his Church? that there
was first one stood up and made a covenant, and
then another, and these two ioyned together, and
so a third, and there became a church, say they."
The simplicity of this action is striking. There
was no bishop and no council of churches. There
was no test of creed. The covenant was made
between man and man, and its terms were very
plain. This is precisely the action to which Wil
liam Bradford refers when he says 2 that these
Separatists "joyned themselves (by a covenant of
the Lord) into a church estate, in ye fellowship
of ye gospell, to walke in all his wayes, made
1 "[John Murton] A Description of what God hath predestinated con
cerning Man," etc., 1620, p. 169.
2 "Of Plimoth Plantation," 1898, p. 13.

GAINSBOROUGH AND SCROOBY 49
known, or to be made known unto them, according
to their best endeavours, whatever it should cost
them, the Lord assisting them."
This simple organization did not imply a lack
of personal leadership. The very opposite was
true. From the beginning strong men were asso
ciated with the Scrooby congregation.
First was Richard Clyfton. To his preaching,
perhaps, the very inception of the movement goes
back. Bradford says that he was "a grave and
reverend preacher, who by his pains and diligence
had done much good, and under God had been the
means of the conversion of many."1 He also
tells us that Clyfton was "sound and orthodox"
to his end. He was the rector of Babworth, be
tween six and seven miles south of Scrooby, and
nine miles from Austerfield, from which village
William Bradford sometimes walked on Sundays
to hear him preach. It may be a personal remi
niscence when Bradford says of him, " Much good
had he done in the country where he lived, and
converted many to God by his faithful and painful
ministry, both in preaching and catechizing." It
was a precious fruit of his ministry indeed if the
choice spirit of William Bradford was one that he
led into the Christian life. He was probably dis-
1 "Of Plimoth Plantation," p. 14.

50 JOHN ROBINSON
placed by the enforcement of the canons of 1603-4,
and became one of the members united by covenant
with his fellow Separatists in Scrooby church.
William Bradford, later governor of Plymouth,
and author of the priceless history "Of Plimoth
Plantation," now preserved in the State Library
of Massachusetts at Boston, was one of the younger
members of the church, and did not assume his
position of prominence until after the emigration
to America. He was born in the village of Auster-
field, three miles from Scrooby, and baptized there
March 19, 1589 [1590]. His connection with the
Scrooby congregation was probably brought about
through his association with Richard Clyfton while
the latter was preaching in Babworth, before he
was silenced by the ecclesiastical authorities.
The leader of the movement who stands out
most clearly at the beginning, on account of his
connection with the manor house and his practical
service to the cause, is William Brewster. He
was a man of great individual power and singular
personal worth. He was a printer rather than a
writer when the time for the defense of the Sepa
ration came. We have no book preserved from
his pen, and so there is no source from which to
reach an estimate of his strength as a writer. His
great service to the Separation did not lie in the

GAINSBOROUGH AND SCROOBY 51
written defense of its principles, or in the preser
vation of its history. He was the central figure
in the early history of the Scrooby congregation
and always one of its strongest members and most
judicious leaders.
Neither Clyfton, Bradford nor Brewster, how
ever, is the person who assumed the final leader
ship of the Scrooby company. Any one of them
might, perhaps, have saved the little church
from the wreck which was made so sadly by the
congregations of Browne, Johnson (the Ancient
London Church), and Smyth, who pushed on to
Holland ahead of the Scrooby brethren. There
was another man who would prove himself great
enough to master the Separation and embody it
for the first time in a successful organization. This
was John Robinson, the subject of this biography.

Ill
JOHN ROBINSON
UNTIL HE JOINS THE
SEPARATIST CONGREGATION

CHAPTER III
THE LIFE OF JOHN ROBINSON UNTIL HE JOINS THE
SEPARATIST CONGREGATION AT SCROOBY
There is no contemporary biography of John
Robinson; nor has the attempt been made to
treat with any degree of completeness from the
original sources the course of his thought, the con
tribution he made to his age, or the personality of
the man himself. Governor Bradford has given
us a few paragraphs in his famous "Dialogue"
regarding Robinson; there are also a few scat
tered contemporary opinions concerning him. But
these are not adequate to enable us fully to trace
the course of events with which he was so actively
associated. Nor are his writings strongly autobi
ographical. He never boasts of what he has done;
he keeps far out of sight in his controversies.
But, while we are thus limited on the objective
aide, we shall find that Robinson is constantly
revealing himself on the subjective side. He dis
closes his heart; he lays bare the motive forces of
his life. It is a character singularly simple and
consistent ; it is the soul of a man to be loved which
55

56 JOHN ROBINSON
we discover in these old controversial pamphlets
and sometimes dreary discussions. Our chief
sources are those passages in his preserved books
where John Robinson writes out of his very heart.
The year of his birth is determined from an
entry in the records of the University of Leyden.
On September 5, 1615, by permission of the over
seers, he was admitted to the university, being
then thirty-nine years of age and supporting a
family. Therefore he was born in 1575 or 1576.
He died in Leyden in 1625. His life covered a
span of a half century, the last quarter of the six
teenth and the first quarter of the seventeenth.
The period of his life which concerns us most
closely was contemporaneous with the reign of
King James I of England, 1603-1625.
The place of his birth we are not able as yet to
determine surely. The conjecture is that he was
born in Gainsborough. There is at least a prob
ability that this is true. Dr. Henry M. Dexter
searched the parish records, which are in very
imperfect condition, and was not able to discover
any record of his baptism there. l This, however,
is negative evidence only. Hunter 2 notes the fact
1 See "Congregationalism as Seen, etc." p. 359, note 1.
2 See "Collections, etc.: the Founders of New Plymouth," London.
1854, p. 93.

UNTIL HE JOINS THE SEPARATISTS 57
that prominent dissenters during the reign of
King Charles II were Robinsons of Gainsborough.
In the time of his greatest perplexity he turned
toward Gainsborough as one might be drawn
toward the home of his youth.
Certainly we may be right in imagining the boy
hood years of the lad spent in this old town, a
picture of which George Eliot gives in "The Mill
on the Floss." Gainsborough is St. Oggs, and the
gray antiquity and sweet charm of the place are
revealed in her description : —
" It is one of those old, old towns, which impress
one as a continuation and outgrowth of nature,
as much as the nests of the bower-birds, or the
winding galleries of the white ants; a town which
carries the traces of its long growth and history
like a millennial tree, and has sprung up and devel
oped in the same spot, between the river and the
low hill, from the time when the Roman legions
turned their backs on it from the camp on the
hillside, and the long-haired sea kings came up
the river and looked with fierce, eager eyes at the
fatness of the land. It is a 'town familiar with
forgotten' years.' The shadow of the Saxon hero
king still walks there fitfully, reviewing the scenes
of his youth and love time, and is met by the
gloomier shadow of the dreadful heathen Dane,
who was stabbed in the midst of his warriors by
the sword of an invisible avenger, and who rises
on autumn evenings like a white mist from the

58 JOHN ROBINSON
tumulus on the hill, and hovers in the court ofthe
Old Hall by the river side — the spot where he was
miraculously slain in the days before the Old Hall
was built. It was the Normans who began to
build that fine old hall, which is like the town,
telling of the thoughts and hands of widely-sun
dered- generations ; but it is all so old that we look
with loving pardon at its inconsistencies, and are
well content that they who built the stone oriel
and they who built the Gothic facade and towers
of finest small brickwork, with the trefoil ornament
and the windows and battlements defined with
stone, did not sacrilegiously pull down the ancient,
half-timbered body, with its oak-roofed banqueting
hall." Gainsborough, then, with its long history and
its busy trade, may have been Robinson's birth
place. If it was, his boyhood was spent in a town
where there were not only active interests to engage
him, but all the charm of romance and venerable
story to kindle his imagination.
There have been other conjectures as to his
place of birth, none of which seems so probable as
this. John Browne 1 thinks it quite possible that
he was the son of John Robinson, d.d., an arch
deacon and precentor of Lincoln Cathedral, and
that he was born in Lincoln. There is hardly so
mu probability in this as there is in the con-
1 "The Pilgrim Fathers of New England and their Puritan Successors,"
London, 1895, p. 95.

UNTIL HE JOINS THE SEPARATISTS 59
jecture that he was born in Gainsborough. Still
less probable is the suggestion of Gordon in the
" Dictionary of National Biography" that Robin
son was born in Saxlingham.
Concerning his childhood we really know noth
ing. There is a reference in one of his "Essays"
to the harmful indulgence of mothers and grand
parents toward children.1 From this Dr. Henry
M. Dexter2 thought it might be possible to infer
that he lost his father early in life. But there is
not enough evidence to warrant this conclusion.
We are equally uninformed concerning his family
or the social station into which he was born. But
there seem to have been considerable periods of
time after he had become involved in trouble with
the church authorities when he existed with no
visible means of support. Also he printed many
books which must have cost him large sums of
money, since their sale was forbidden at home.
And in Leyden he was concerned in the purchase
of a large property, the so-called John Robinson
house. His writings never hint at the pinch of
poverty. These facts would seem at least to indi
cate that he was not from a poor family. This
is, to be sure, negative evidence. It is not w;th-
1 Works, 1:246.
2 "Congregationalism as Seen, etc." p. 360.

60 JOHN ROBINSON
out value, however. The pinching of poverty
generally betrays itself somewhere in a man's
writings or it is discoverable in his actions. There
is nothing of the sort in evidence in Robinson's
case. The first records which we have in England
concerning him are from Corpus Christi College,
Cambridge, from which we learn that he was ad
mitted in 1592 and was fellow in 1598. There is,
curiously, the record of another John Robinson on
the rolls of Emanuel College, Cambridge, but this
is clearly concerned with another person than the
subject of this biography.1
The Corpus Christi record describes Robinson
as from the county of Lincoln, and Masters adds
the information that this was the John Robinson
who later lived in Holland. In 1831 a new edition
of Masters' History of Corpus Christi College
(originally published in 1749) was issued, in which
1 The record on the register of Emanuel College is "John Robinson, en
tered as sizar, March 2d, 1592: took his M. A. 1600 and B. D. 1607."
This cannot refer to our Robinson, who could not have taken his B.D.
degree from Cambridge so late as 1607, for he had decided for the Separa
tion before that time. This entry misled Young (see "Chronicles," p.
452) into supposing that this Emanuel graduate was the later Separatist.
Also James Savage in "Gleanings from New England History" (Mass.
Hist. Soe. Coll. Series 3, Vol. 8, pp. 248-249) makes the same error. Greg
ory in "Puritanism," p. 211, says that Robinson was a fellow of Christ's
College, Cambridge; on p. 214 he says that Robinson "graduated at Cor
pus Christi College, Cambridge, in 1592, and became a Fellow probably
in 1599."

UNTIL HE JOINS THE SEPARATISTS 61
the editor, Dr. Lamb, refers to this record, and
says that Robinson succeeded a Mr. Morley as
fellow in 1598 and resigned his fellowship in 1604.
He also says that Robinson was from Notting
hamshire. No satisfactory authorities are given
for these assertions, and they add nothing trust
worthy to the scant store of our reliable informa
tion. The change in the matter of counties may
be explained easily if Robinson was born in Gains
borough, as the Trent is the dividing line between
Lincolnshire and Nottinghamshire.
Robinson entered the University of Cambridge
during the splendor of the reign of Queen Eliza
beth. Four years before, the Lord's winds had
blown and the Spanish Armada had gone to its de
struction. The menace of Philip the Catholic had
been in vain; the danger of a return to the policy
of Queen Mary was averted. In contemporary
life, George Chapman was thirty-five years of age;
Christopher Marlowe, twenty-eight; Shakespeare,
twenty-eight; Ben Jonson, nineteen; Sir Walter
Raleigh and Edmund Spenser, forty; Francis
Bacon, thirty-one; Richard Hooker, thirty-eight;
and Joseph Hall, eighteen. Thomas Cartwright
was in prison in the Fleet, London. William Per
kins was preacher at St. Andrews. Henry Jacob
was twenty-nine; Robert Browne, forty; Francis

62 JOHN ROBINSON
Johnson, thirty; Henry Ainsworth, twenty-one.
Barrow and Greenwood were spending their last
year of life on earth in the Fleet prison. This was
the general situation.
Cambridge University as a whole was strongly
colored by Puritanism. The atmosphere of the
place was liberal, and there certainly was consider
able laxity in the enforcement of rigid uniformity
of worship. The leaders of the Separation were
almost universally Cambridge men.
Corpus Christi, or Benet College, was one of the
smaller of the Cambridge group. Its Master when
Robinson entered was Jegon, who was also Vice-
Chancellor of the University. It may have had
about one hundred and ten students at this time.
Robert Browne, his coworker, Harrison, and John
Greenwood had all been students at this college.
We have no particulars concerning the course of
John Robinson's student life in Cambridge so far
as its objective details are concerned. He took a
degree at the university, for Joseph Hall writes to
him, " You have twice kneeled to our Vice-Chan-
cellor, when you were admitted to your degree."1
Whether this was the master's or the bachelor's
degree we cannot determine. In 1598 or 1599
Robinson became Fellow of the university, and
1 "Common Apologie," p. 90.

UNTIL HE JOINS THE SEPARATISTS 63
probably soon after that took up his work as a
curate in the Church of England.
It was while he was a member of the church estab
lished by law in England that his personal religious
life began. He speaks of it in the defense of the
Separation which he made against Puchard Ber
nard,1 as follows:
"We do with all thankfulness to our God ac
knowledge, and with much comfort remember,
those lively feelings of God's love, and former
graces wrought in us, and that one special grace
amongst the rest by which we have been enabled
to draw ourselves into visible covenant, and holy
communion. Yea with such comfort and assurance
do we call to mind the Lord's work of old this
way in us, as we doubt not but our salvation was
sealed up unto our consciences, by most infallible
marks and testimonies, which could not deceive,
before we conceived the least thought of separa
tion; and so we hope it is with many others in the
Church of England, yea, and of Rome also."
" And for our personal conversion in the Church
of England we deny it not, but do, and always
have so done, judge and profess it true there."
Religion was a matter of personal relationship
between Robinson's soul and God, rather than an
official relationship in an ecclesiastical institution.
He described it in the terms of the prevailing
Calvinistic theology as the bestowment upon him
1 See Works, 2:65,75.

64 JOHN ROBINSON
of a special divine grace. For the individual this
was enough to enable him to unite himself into
covenant relations with God. This change of
life Robinson described reverently. It was rad
ical. It embraced his whole being. From that
time on he was a "new man in Christ Jesus." If
Robinson entered the university at the age of sev
enteen it is hardly likely that an experience of
which he speaks so profoundly would have come
into his life before that age. We are probably
safe in ascribing the change which Robinson calls
his conversion to the period of his university
career. It was a time peculiarly adapted to a
fundamental examination of his personal relations
to God, and for the settlement of the purposes
which should thereafter control his life. We shall
discover that he was very sensitive to personal
influences, and that the greatest decisions of his
life were reached through personal contact with
men whose opinion and character he respected.
So far as we can determine the forces which oper
ated upon him in Cambridge to transform the
motives of his life, they emanated chiefly from
William Perkins. He was the catechist of Christ's
College, and lecturer at St. Andrew's Church.
Robinson always held Perkins in the highest
esteem, speaking of him as ' ' one of our own

UNTIL HE JOINS THE SEPARATISTS 65
nation, of great account, and that worthily, with
all that fear God, however he were against us in our
practice."1 Robinson also wrote and published
a supplement to Perkins' " The Foundation of the
Christian Religion," which book, he says, fully
contains "what every Christian is to believe
touching God and himself."2 The supplement
published by Robinson takes up the subjects
peculiar to Separatist teaching only. Hence Rob
inson found in the teachings of Perkins those
fundamental truths necessary to religious conver
sion, as he conceived it.
Robinson took orders in the Church of England.
In 1610 he classes himself with John Smyth and
others of the Separation as having ' ' renounced
our ministry received from the bishops, and do
exercise another by the people's choice."3 In
thus entering upon his life 's work he was following
out the native bent of his character and taking up
a duty which he loved. He was a pastor rather
than a controversialist, and when, later in life, he
was .drawn into the intense and often bitter dis
cussions which attended the Separation, he wrote,
" The preaching of the gospel is a most excellent
thing, and the fruits of it far better than those of
Eden, and oh! how happy were we, if, with ex-
1 Works, 2 : 446. 2 Ibid. , 3 : 426. 3 Ibid. , 2 : 405.

66 JOHN ROBINSON
change of half the days of our lives, we might
freely publish it to our own nation for the con
verting of sinners."1
This first slight glimpse which we get into the
heart of the young minister shows us a man of
simple, noble purpose, the whole trend of whose
life is religious, seeking through the avenues of
preaching and pastoral care to give himself lav
ishly to the weal of his fellow men. He is such a
spirit as we should expect to find expressing him
self through the avenue of the Christian ministry.
The general nature of his short term of pastoral
service in the Church of England we can construct
from what we know of the man's nature, and from
a few slight contemporary witnesses. It was a
time filled with earnest, faithful service to his
parish. Neal says : 2 —
"Mr. John Robinson was a Norfolk divine
beneficed about Yarmouth, where being often
molested by the bishop's officers, and his friends
almost ruined in the ecclesiastical courts, he re
moved to Leyden, and erected a congregation upon
the model of the Brownists."
If Robinson was a curate or rector at Yarmouth,
this parish never occupied the place in his heart
'Works, 3:37.
2 "History of the Puritans, " 1 : 244.

UNTIL HE JOINS THE SEPARATISTS 67
that was held by another place where he worked,
Norwich. Henry Ainsworth, who probably came
from the region of Norwich himself, says in his
" Counterpoyson" : a —
"Witness the late practice in Norwich, where
certain citizens were excommunicated for resort
ing unto and praying with Mr. Robinson, a man
worthily reverenced of all the city for the graces
of God in him (as yourself also, I suppose, will
acknowledge) and to whom the care and charge
of their souls was erewhile committed. "
Here Ainsworth definitely describes Robinson's
position as having established his reputation in
the city of Norwich itself. Hence, it would seem
that the sphere of his labor was near Norwich or in
the very city.
The same conclusion must be drawn from the
preface of one of Robinson's minor writings, "The
People's Plea for the Exercise of Prophecy," in
which he dedicates his treatise " To my Christian
Friends in Norwich and thereabouts."2 In the
course of this dedication he says, " And for you,
my Christian friends, towards whom for your
persons I am minded, even as when I lived with
you, be you admonished by me." The entire
tone of this preface and dedication is like the
1 Edition of 1642, p. 145. <¦"
2 Works, 3:285ff. _. *-'"'

68 JOHN ROBINSON
tenderer letters of St. Paul to the congregations
which he had gathered, but from which he had
been compelled to separate. Robinson still bore
his people upon his heart, rejoiced in their suc
cess, and sorrowed with their trials and perscu-
tions. Let us look briefly now at the general religious
character of this region about Norwich. Norfolk
had received the great influx of refugees who had
been driven out of the Netherlands during the
period of Roman Catholic persecution. These
immigrants represented the best of the Flemish
weavers, and they brought prosperity particularly
to Norfolk and London. The city of Norwich
was thereby advanced to a position of commer
cial leadership second only to London. In 1587
the Dutch and Walloons formed a majority of the
city's population. But they brought more than
their frugality and skill in the textile arts.
They were Protestants ; many among them be-
belonged to the despised Anabaptists. It was
among these people that the Lollard movement
took deepest root and spread most rapidly.
Norfolk was the chief sufferer in the persecutions
during the reign of Queen Mary. Norwich was
early counted as a Puritan stronghold. There
Robert Browne had gathered his first church, a

UNTIL HE JOINS THE SEPARATISTS 69
few members of which probably remained and
perpetuated their organization as late as 1603.
This was the general character of the sphere in
which Robinson, coming from the strong Puritan
atmosphere which he evidently had breathed in
Cambridge, began his ministry. The former Master
of Corpus Christi College, Jegon, became Bishop
of Norwich in February, 1602. Robinson soon
became involved in trouble with the ecclesiastical
authorities, probably on account of failure to con
form in the use of the ceremonies prescribed by the
Prayer-Book. The trouble at first was not seri
ous. He was subject to the same annoyance and
discipline that Richard Bernard, and other Puritan
preachers, met occasionally. The whole difficulty
might have been obviated had he been willing
to conform fully to the requirements of the Prayer-
Book. As he retorts to Bernard, "We might
have enjoyed both our liberty and peace, at the
same woeful rate with you and your fellows" —
that is, by conformity. -1
But Robinson never complained of what he had
suffered. Nor did he move forward because he
was driven by resentment. He seems to have
moved slowly, and he shrank from taking the step
of final separation until he had exhausted every
1 See Works, 2: 54.

70 JOHN ROBINSON
expedient which would enable him to remain in
the Church of England and still preserve his con
victions regarding its communion, polity and wor
ship. He evidently sought to free himself from the
censure which he had received. Joseph Hall says
to him, " As for absolution, you have a spite at it,
because you sought it, and were repulsed."1
In what way Robinson thus sought to set him
self right with the church authorities we do not
know. But the next step which he took, proba
bly after he had been suspended from the minis
try, certainly before he had either left Norwich or
decided fully for Separation, was to attempt to
secure a chaplaincy to some nobleman, or to serve
in a private chapel or hospital. Here the condi
tions of conformity were not so rigid, and it was a
frequent expedient with the Puritan preachers.
He applied, therefore, for the Mastership of the
hospital at Norwich, but failed to secure it. While
this matter was pending, Robinson probably re
mained, a suspended minister, in Norwich. His
attitude is probably fairly represented by Joseph
Hall, who says: —
" Tell us, how long was it after your suspension
and before your departure, that you could have
1 ' ' Common Apologie, "p. 77.

UNTIL HE JOINS THE SEPARATISTS 71
been content, upon condition (that is, the appoint
ment to a chaplaincy or the hospital) to have worn
this linen badge of your 'man of sin?' Was not
this your resolution when you went from Norwich
to Lincolnshire after your suspension?" x
There is another reference to the same fact by
Hall, in the "Common Apologie" 2 as follows:
"Before that God and his blessed Angels and
Saints, we fear not to protest, that we are undoubt
edly persuaded, that whosoever wilfully forsakes
the Communion, Government, Ministry, or Wor
ship of the Church of England, are enemies to the
Septre of Christ, and Rebels against his Church
and Anointed : neither doubt we to say, that the
Mastership of the Hospital at Norwich, or a lease
from that city (sued for with repulse), might
have procured that this Sep. fr. the Com. Govt.
& Worship of the Ch. of Eng. should not have
been made by John Robinson. "
The time soon came, therefore, when Robinson
found that a restoration to his clerical office was
impossible; his friends were suffering heavy losses
by fines from the courts; and there was, at least
near Norwich, no place in which he could exercise
his ministry without full conformity. He went,
he tells us, to many places where he hoped to find
satisfaction to his "troubled heart." There is a
1 See Hanbury, "Historical Memorials, " 1: 198.
2 Page 113.

72 JOHN ROBINSON
tender pathos in the few words with which Robin
son refers to his experience at this great crisis in
his life. All his desires were set toward ministry
in the church. He longed to preach; he yearned
to carry forward his task of pastoral care in a
parish. The testimony of jBastwick 1 is probably
trustworthy as showing the real ground of Robin
son's decision: —
" If I can speak thus much in the presence of
God, that Master Robinson of Leiden, the pastor
of the Brownist Church, there told me and others,
who are yet living to witnesse the truth of what I
now say, that if he might in England have injoyed
but the liberty of his Ministry there, with an immu
nity but from the very Ceremonies, and that they
had not forced him to a subscription to them, and
impressed upon him the observation of them, that
hee had never separated from it, or left that
Church." He did not reach the decision easily. He went
to many places seeking help in his trouble. Among
these, he visited Cambridge. He had come to the
point where he saw plain arguments warranting
separation; but he did. not yet take the step.
Reaching Cambridge he went to hear a forenoon
lecture by Lawrence Chadderton, who had been
Master of Emanuel College since its foundation
1 ' ' The Utter Routing of the Whole Army of all the Independents &
Sectaries, " 1646, cxvii.

UNTIL HE JOINS THE SEPARATISTS 73
in 1584, and was a famous lecturer. The lecture
which he heard was to the effect that " the things
which concerned the whole church were to be de
clared publicly to the whole church and not to
some part only." This seemed to him to confirm
one main ground of the Separatist teaching, that
is, " that Christ hath given his power for excommu
nication to the whole church." In all the parish
assemblies he could find no church having this
power or so exercising it.
In the afternoon of the same day he went to
hear a lecture by Paul Baynes, the successor of
William Perkins in St. Andrews. The theme of
this lecture also fitted the questioning mood of the
hearer. It was "the unlawfulness of familiar
conversation between the servants of God and the
wicked." Some years afterwards Robinson was
able to reproduce the argument of this lecture in
brief outline, showing that he took notes of it or
listened most intently. In private conversation
with Baynes soon afterward he questioned the
lecturer as to whether his position did not neces
sitate a separation in spiritual matters of the
righteous from the apparently wicked, even in the
parish assemblies.
The influence of these Cambridge men upon
him was very strong. He does not give us any

74 JOHN ROBINSON
details concerning his movements from Cambridge
to Gainsborough. All we know is that he finally
appeared in more or less intimate connection with
a Separatist congregation which had been formed
there. If Gainsborough was his early home it
is quite natural to account for his appearance
there. He had become a Separatist during the
time after he left Norwich.
Let us turn now to the subjective history of
Robinson's decision for the Separation. We
have a fairly satisfactory record of it here and
there in his writings. The first impression that
we receive concerning it is that the whole mental
change is the natural result of those forces which
we have found working upon him in his environ
ment. His experience is not to be explained as
the result of a solitary struggle. The lone agony
and the new vision which had been experienced
by Luther were not the way in which Robinson
came to his final position. As Marcks says of
John Calvin, : " he was penetrated slowly by the
new spirit; he did not need to build for himself
his own way to knowledge;" Luther had done
this for himself and for all men.
At the outset Robinson was a member of the
State Church, and his ambitions were toward its
1 Life of Coligny, Vol. 1: p. 282.

UNTIL HE JOINS THE SEPARATISTS 75
ministry. So far as the doctrines of that church
were concerned he held them without dissent.
Like Barrow, he made a distinction between
the "faith" and "order" of the Church of Eng
land. Of the former he made no question. All
the difficulty he experienced was with the latter.
The general influences of Cambridge we have
noted. It must have been while here that he
began to read books written in defense of the
Separation, "the taste of which," he says, was
"sweet as honey unto my mouth."1 But he did
not go to the extreme of Separation. The per
sonal influence of men like Perkins held him
firmly in check. Here we discover one of the
determining traits of his character, his thorough
respect for the learning and judgment of others.
Indeed, this becomes at times almost an element
of weakness with him. He found it necessary to
apologize for the fact that he did not follow out
his very first convictions to their logical conclu
sion in Separation by saying : —
"The very principal thing, which for the time
quenched all further appetite in me, was the over
valuation which I made of the learning and holi
ness of these [Cambridge men, such as Whitaker,
Perkins, Cartwright, and others] and the like per
sons, blushing in myself to have a thought of
1 Works, 2: 51.

76 JOHN ROBINSON
passing one hair breadth before them in this thing,
behind whom I knew myself to come so many
miles in all other things."
So he began his ministry. The theoretical life
of the student was exchanged for the practical
life of the pastor. Theories concerning church
government came to the test of practical use. It
was a question as to which form of polity would
enable the church to realize its ideal of a commun
ion of saints. This was the Calvinistic concep
tion which Robinson held concerning the church :
it was a body of men and women who gave visible
signs of the spiritual change known as regeneration.
With this conception of the church the young min
ister, a man of ethical earnestness, encountered
the parish system of the Ghurch of England in a
region whose atmosphere was permeated with
radical thought concerning the true order of church
government. This was a new stage in Robinson's experience.
The question of theory became a question of prac
tice. At first the ceremonies were a rock of offense
to him. But now he faced the question, Could
the church, as organized under the parish system,
effect its own purification? That purification was
necessary in order to a true church. If the
Church of England was powerless to this end, then

UNTIL HE JOINS THE SEPARATISTS 77
some other form of church government was imper
ative. The whole question was open again, this
time from another point of view. Again there
was the same sense of weight to be given to the
opinions of other men; but the final court of appeal
was not human opinion; it was the Scriptures.
Robinson tells the story himself briefly : —
" Yea, and even of late times, when I had entered
into a more serious consideration of these things,
and, according to the measure of grace received,
searched the Scriptures, whether they were so or
no, and by searching found much light of truth;
yet was the same so dimmed and overclouded
with the contradictions of these men and others
of the like note, that had not the truth been in my
heart as a burning fire shut up in my bones (Jer.
20 :9) I had never broken those bonds of flesh and
blood, wherein I was so straitly tied, but had
suffered the light of God to have been put out in
mine own untruthful heart by other men's dark
ness." Therefore, .convinced by practical experience
that the "order" of the Anglican Church was
incapable of realizing the ideal of the church as
the communion of saints, and sure that the Scrip
tures prescribed another "order," in which gov
ernment by bishops formed no part, Robinson
followed the light of his new conviction and became

78 JOHN ROBINSON
a Separatist. He cast in his lot among his breth
ren at Gainsborough. We shall now follow him
as he moves forward quickly to a secure position
of leadership among them.

IV
THE SCROOBY CONGREGATION
AND THEIR LIFE AT AMSTERDAM

SCROOBY MANOR

CHAPTER IV
THE EMIGRATION OF THE SCROOBY CONGREGATION
TO AMSTERDAM AND THEIR LIFE THERE
The gathering of the Scrooby congregation in
the old manor house could not go on without at
tracting the attention of the officers of the Church
of England, who were compelled to alertness by
the severe penalties which the canons of 1603-4
pronounced against those who failed to present
non-conformists for punishment. The Separatist
ministers were silenced, the people who sympa
thized with them were subjected to the contempt
of their fellows, and finally the heavy hand of the
law was laid upon them. They were cited before
the courts and life was made a burden for them.
They endured it patiently for years.1
The most earnest of the Puritan ministers in
the vicinity were not at all unwilling to see the
schismatic movement crushed out by drastic meas
ures, and there are witnesses to the fact that a
few of them were personally ready to bear a hand
in it. In 1600 Francis Johnson had written,
1 See Bradford, "Of Plimoth Plantation," Boston, 1898, p. 12.
81

82 JOHN ROBINSON
"not the Prelates alone, but you also [i.e. the
zealous Puritans] have wittingly and willingly
your hand in our blood." ~l The strife between the
Puritan preachers and the Separatists in the neigh
borhood became sharp. One of them, Richard
Bernard, according to the testimony of John Rob
inson, " did separate from the rest an hundred voluntary
professors into covenant with the Lord, sealed
up with the Lord's Supper, to forsake all known
sin, to hear no wicked or dumb ministers, and the
like, which covenant long since you have dissolved,
not shaming to affirm you did it only in policy
to keep your people from Mr. Smyth." 2
This shows how sharp the collision was between
the men who had advanced to the pronounced
positions of Puritanism, and the men who were
carrying out those positions to their full logical
conclusion. It was a struggle for life between the
two sorts of congregations.
So, subjected to a cross-fire from the alert Angli
can officials on the one side and the exasperated
Puritan preachers on the other, the Separatists
in Scrooby met such persecution as to make their
life almost unendurable. Then they turned long
ing eyes to Holland. The conditions of religious
1 "An Answer to Master H. Jacob his Defence, " 1600.
2 Works, 2: 101.

THE SCROOBY CONGREGATION 83
toleration which obtained there were well known;
it was accessible by ship from such ports as Hull
and Boston; and there was before them for their
encouragement the example of the Ancient Lon
don Church and John Smyth's congregation.
But it was one thing to reach their decision to
emigrate, as Bradford says they did "by joynte
consent," and quite another to carry out their
plans. It was against the laws of the realm for
any one to leave the ports of England without the
king's consent. Just why such a law should be
enforced against the poor Separatists, of whom
the church authorities were glad to be rid, and
whose offenses made them the legitimate objects
of banishment, is hard to see. It was enforced,
however, and so the Separatist leaders were com
pelled to make secret bargains with sea captains
and to pay exorbitant rates for passage.
The first attempt was made by "a large com
panie" of the Scrooby congregation, who bar
gained with a captain for the exclusive use of his
ship. He agreed to meet them at a specified time
and place and to take them and their goods to
Holland. This captain was an Englishman, and
the place of meeting was near Boston.
The date of this enterprise can be determined
with tolerable accuracy from the official records

84 JOHN ROBINSON
concerning William Brewster. The declared ac
counts of Sir John Stanhope for wages of post
masters on the road between London and Berwick
contain the amounts paid to William Brewster
from April 1, 1594, until they ceased September
30, 1607. We can be certain that Brewster did
not yield his official position, which involved so
vitally the whole Separatist interest in Scrooby,
until he was compelled to do so by openly joining
in the emigration. Therefore the first movement
toward Holland probably took place in October
and November, 1607. 1
The perfidy of the English captain, however,
involved it in disaster. He delayed his coming
beyond the time agreed upon, thus involving the
poor people in great anxiety and expense. Then
he took them on board and betrayed them all to
the officers. The Boston officials who seized the
would-be exiles treated them harshly, took them
to the shore in open boats, searched and rifled
them, and made them a public spectacle in the
town. The magistrates, however, seem to have
been more lenient with them. They were, indeed,
committed to prison, whence they could not be
released without the consent of the Privy Council.
1 The whole matter of Brewster's relation to the Scrooby post-office
is worked out in Arber, "Story of the Pilgrim Fathers, " pp. 71-86.

THE SCROOBY CONGREGATION 85
This permission came within the course of a month,
when all were released and sent home with the
exception of seven, who were kept in prison and
bound over to the assizes for trial.
Who these seven were we cannot tell. Doubt
less Brewster was openly connected with the move
ment and probably also Robinson, Clyfton and
Bradford. In the spring months of 1608 another attempt
was made by a considerable company, including
many who had failed in the Boston effort, and
others who had not before ventured upon the
dangerous enterprise. This time they entrusted
themselves to a Dutch captain, who agreed to
meet them at a meadow on the shores of the mouth
of the river Humber between Hull and Grimsby.
The women and the goods were sent ahead in a
small boat; the men were to meet them by land.
But either the small boat was a day too early or
the Dutch captain a day too late, and the small
boat put into a creek, where she grounded. The
next morning the ship came and took a part of the
men on board; but before the women, and goods
could be taken from the small boat, which was
still grounded, the officers came, the Dutch cap
tain set sail, and the poor emigrants were divided.
The men on board the ship suffered an intensely

86 JOHN ROBINSON
stormy passage of two weeks before they finally
reached Holland. The officers were left with a
company of women and innocent children on
their hands, whom they could hardly punish and
were finally glad to release. Thus the second
effort of the emigrants failed.
They seem to have learned wisdom from these
disasters. They saw that any effort to escape
in a body was bound to be futile. The nucleus
which escaped with the Dutch captain were already
in Holland and thus could aid their brethren from
that side. Therefore they escaped, a few at a
time. In the picturesque words of Bradford, —
" they all gat over at length. Some at one time,
and some at another; and some in one place and
some in another: and met together again, accord
ing to their desires, with no small rejoicing."1
Such were some of the trials through which
the Separatists passed in their effort to reach Hol
land. The results of it were twofold. The arrest
of so many people at Boston and Hull awakened
discussion, and brought the Separation more and
more to popular attention. And then the hard
ship through which the people passed sifted out
the weak and faint-hearted. Twice the Pilgrim
Fathers were thus sifted ; once, when they removed
1 "Of Plimoth Plantation," p. 21.

THE SCROOBY CONGREGATION 87
from Scrooby to Amsterdam; again, when they
made the emigration from Leyden to Plymouth.
They were men of sturdy stuff.
The Scrooby brethren were compelled to move
to Holland slowly. Not all of them went over. In
1614 Robinson referred to the members of his con
gregation still remaining in England. J Among the
last to leave were Robinson, Brewster and ' other
principall members." This was the natural thing
under the conditions. Robinson carried out the
same plan in the later emigration from Leyden
to America, remaining in Holland with the weaker
members of his church, and planning to go to
America so soon as he should be able to leave.
Among the last to leave Scrooby was Richard
Clyfton. By this we are able to determine the
date when the Scrooby congregation finally gath
ered in Amsterdam. For, in the family Bible of
Richard Clyfton 's son Zachary, there occurs this
entry : —
"Richard Clyfton, with his wife and children,
came to Amsterdam, in Holland, August 1608."
We may be quite sure that Clyfton was among the
leading members of the Scrooby company who
were the last to come over from England. Hence,
the time occupied by this effort to reach Holland
was from about October 1, 1607, to August, 1608.
1 See Works, 3:102.

88 JOHN ROBINSON
Thus the Scrooby brethren found themselves
at last together in Amsterdam. It was a city in
which there was large freedom in religious mat
ters. Andrew Marvell wrote,
" Hence Amsterdam, Turk-Christian-Pagan-Jew,
Staple of sects, and mint of schism grew ;
That Bank of Conscience, where not one so strange
Opinion but finds credit and exchange." '
And, in an open letter to John Robinson, which
probably reached him soon after he arrived in
Amsterdam, Joseph Hall says of the city, "Lo!
there a common harbour of all opinions, of all
heresies if not a mixture."2 And it is probably
true that, at this time, "you might understand
more of England at Amsterdam than at London. " 3
On reaching the city, Robinson found several
congregations of English-speaking people who
were allowed freedom of worship by the magis
trates. There was a Scotch Presbyterian church,
whose minister, Rev. John Paget, wrote "An
Arrow against the Separation of the Brownists"
in 1618. This book gives evidence that he knew
quite intimately the history of the Separatist con
gregations in the city.

'Satires. Character of Holland, " p. 71.
Quoted in Robinson's "Answer to a C
33.
" See Mullinger. "Introduction to English History, " p. 318.

2 Quoted in Robinson's "Answer to a Censorious Epistle," Works,
3:403.

THE SCROOBY CONGREGATION 89
The Ancient London Church had been in Am
sterdam, passing through a stormy period of
existence, since 1597. In his book, "The Story
of the Pilgrim Fathers," Arber makes a severe
arraignment of this church on the ground of the
immoral character of its members. His indict
ment rests upon the trustworthiness of certain
sources which surely are open to question on that
point, and it is to be doubted if the character of
this Ancient London Church is as black as he paints
it. It is, however, a sad story of family and church
wrangling at the best. The year during which
the Scrooby brethren resided in Amsterdam was a
period of repressed hostility between the factions
in the Ancient Church. The old troubles were
still alive, and this fact was evidently clear to Rob
inson, who was as far-sighted an observer of men
as he was an ardent lover of peace.
The other congregation, of which John Smyth
was pastor, may have numbered among its mem
bers some of the very neighbors of the Scrooby
Church in England. At the beginning the Gains
borough company probably worshiped with the
Ancient London Church; Smyth was a restless
soul, who could not be at peace long under the
most favorable conditions. He soon made a point
of conscience of minor matters, and withdrew from

90 JOHN ROBINSON
the fellowship of the Ancient Church. Finally he
became a Baptist, was cast out of his congrega
tion, and the storm in his church was at its height.
This condition of things was intolerable to a man
of Robinson's temper.
Meantime, what was the condition of the Scrooby
church in Amsterdam? It has been maintained
sometimes that the Scrooby brethren were united
with the Ancient London Church while in the city.
Joseph Hall, in his "Common Apologie of the
Church of England," calls Francis Johnson, pas
tor of the Ancient London Church, the "pastor"
of John Robinson. This would imply that Robin
son was a member of the Ancient Church. Noth
ing can be inferred from Hall, however, concerning
the real situation in Amsterdam. He probably
knew only that the congregations from the vicinity
of Gainsborough had emigrated, and supposed that
they were united with the older congregation.
Much more light is thrown upon the matter from
Bradford's statement that when the Scrooby
church prepared to move from Amsterdam to
Leyden, and Richard Clyfton chose not to go with
them, they dismissed him to the Ancient London
Church. This action would not have been taken
if the Scrooby church had not maintained sepa
rate existence during the Amsterdam sojourn.

THE SCROOBY CONGREGATION 91
Probably the Scrooby church met for worship,
perhaps together with the Ancients, in .a large
and gloomy building, which had been a convent,
and stood in the street that still bears the name
of the Brownists' Alley, from the fact that the
English Separatists met there.
We have avoided up to this point any discus
sion of the question of Robinson's official relation
to the Scrooby church. Now it must be taken up.
At the very beginning we are brought face to
face with considerable confusion in regard to the
matter. There are at least two sets of opinions.
The first is that the officers of the church were
chosen in Scrooby before the emigration, and that
Richard Clyfton was the pastor and John Rob
inson the teacher. This is claimed with varying
accents of certainty by Morton Dexter, 1 Arber,2
John Brown,3 Goodwin,4 and Dunning.6 Walk
er 6 thinks that the greater age and pastoral
experience of Clyfton make it likely that he was
chosen pastor rather than Robinson; but it may
have been the reverse. He quotes Bacon also as
1 "The Story of the Pilgrims," 1894, pp. 80, 84.
2 "The Story of the Pilgrim Fathers," 1897, pp. 29, 54.
3 "The Pilgrim Fathers of N. E. , " 1895, p. 127.
4 "The Pilgrim Republic," 1888, pp. 25, 26.
5 "Congregationalists in America," p. 73.
0 ' ' Creeds and Platforms of Congregationalism, " p. 83.

92 JOHN ROBINSON
saying that Clyfton was pastor and Robinson
teacher. On the other hand, the relative offices are re
versed by Hunter,1 who is followed by Henry
Martyn Dexter.2 Hanbury 3 is generally confused.
These writers, however, place the organization in
Scrooby before the emigration.
Ashton,4 also, in the introductory memoir to
Robinson's "Works," thinks that Clyfton was
chosen the pastor of Scrooby church, and that
Robinson was unofficially associated with him.
He holds that Robinson never was formally called
to the pastorate until Scrooby church reached
Leyden. This is probably the ground upon which
the author of the article on Robinson in the
"Dictionary of National Biography" states that
Robinson was "publicly ordained" pastor after
Scrooby church reached Leyden.
In all this conflict of opinion there seems to have
been too little effort to get at the sources, which
are limited and obscure enough at the best, in the
writings of Robinson himself, and in Bradford.
The first reference in Robinson's writings which
1 "Collections," &c, 1854, p. 41.
2 "Congregationalism as Seen, etc." p. 317. "The True Story of
John Smyth," p. 6.
3 "Historical Memorials," 1: 28n., 185, 272.
* pp. xxi and xxx.

THE SCROOBY CONGREGATION 93
we will consider is from his " Defence of the Doc
trine propounded by the Synod of Dort," printed
in 1624, where he says, —
"And for me, do they not know in their con
sciences that I was ordained publicly upon the sol
emn calling of the church, in which I serve, both
in respect of the ordainers and ordained? " x
The second reference is from the concluding
words of the preface to Robinson's treatise, "Of
Religious Communion," 1614; from which it is
clear that the rigid Separation was the reason why
Robinson could not unite with Smyth, and the
same matter was brought up when he was chosen
pastor. " I was, " he says, " by some of the people with
him [Smyth], excepted against, when I was chosen
into office in this church. Indeed afterwards
finding them of other churches, with whom I was
¦ most nearly joined, otherwise minded for the most
part, I did . . . remit and lose of my former
resolution." 2
Now this points almost unmistakably to the
year spent in Amsterdam. For the arguments in
favor of the rigid separation in Robinson's book,
"Justification of Separation from the Church of
England," must have been brought into shape
1 Works, 1 : 463-464.
2 Works, 3: 103.

94 JOHN ROBINSON
either during the last part of his sojourn in Am
sterdam or soon after he reached Leyden. It was
during the year in Amsterdam also that he was
most closely in contact with other churches, to the
personal influence of which he ascribes the great
change in his ideas. In Amsterdam, also, it would
have been most natural that an objection to him
might have come from members of John Smyth's
company. From Robinson let us turn to Bradford. He
says that " besides other worthy men,' ' there were
in the Scrooby Church, "Mr. Richard Clyfton,"
"Mr. John Robinson, who afterwards was their
pastor for many years," "also Mr. William Brew
ster . . . who afterwards was chosen an elder of
ye church. " a Here Clyfton is not called pastor,
which would be a strange omission, inasmuch as
the official relation borne to the church by both
Robinson and Brewster is mentioned. Bradford
is as provokingly indefinite as Robinson in his use
of the term "afterwards."
There is another reference to Clyfton in Gov
ernor Bradford's "Dialogue," in which he says,
"He belonged to the church at Leyden; but
being settled at Amsterdam, and thus aged, he
was loath to remove any more ; and so when they
1 "Of Plimoth Plantation," 14.

THE SCROOBY CONGREGATION 95
removed, he was dismissed to them there, and there
remained until he died."1
We have referred to this testimony of Bradford
as indicating that the Scrooby church maintained
a separate existence in Amsterdam. It would
seem very strange, however, that Clyfton should
be referred to simply as " belonging " to the Leyden
church if he had been their pastor either in Scrooby
or in Amsterdam.
But there is a still more definite statement in
Bradford's "History." He says:
"Now when Mr. Robinson, Mr. Brewster, &
other principall members were come over, (for they
were of ye last, & stayed to help ye weakest over
before them,) such things were thought on as
were necessarie for their setling and best ordering
of ye church affairs. And when they had lived
at Amsterdam aboute a year, Mr. Robinson, their
pastor, and some others of best discerning," etc.2
This seems pretty conclusive evidence. Brad
ford does not speak of this as a further or more
complete settling of the church affairs, but refers
to it as the first definite organization. When the
last of the Scrooby brethren are leaving England,
Robinson is a "principall member" only. But,
while they were passing through the period of
1 See the Volume "New England's Memorial," Boston, 1855, p. 354.
2 "Of Plimoth Plantation," p. 22.

96 JOHN ROBINSON
"aboute a year" in Amsterdam, Robinson seems
to acquire the title of pastor, by which title he is
thereafter known by Bradford.
Still further conclusive is the petition, to which
we shall refer soon, for permission to settle in Ley
den, which is headed in the name of "Jan Ro-
barthse [John Robinson], minister of the Divine
Word." This petition was acted upon February
12, 1609, previous to which date John Robinson
must have been made a minister. He had, as we
have seen, renounced his ordination in the Church
of England. Therefore, before February 12, 1609,
he must have been ordained by the Scrooby church.
But in August, 1608, he was only a principal mem
ber of that church.
Therefore, we believe that the Scrooby church,
gathered in and about the English hamlet of that
name, was first organized with officers in Amster
dam by the choice of John Robinson as pastor,
somewhere between August, 1608, and February,
1609. Is there anything inconsistent with this condi
tion in the principles of the Separatists? They
made a distinction between the church "gath
ered " and the church fully organized and admin
istered by its officers. According to the teaching
of Robinson, whenever two or more faithful people

THE SCROOBY CONGREGATION 97
separate from the world and unite by covenant
into the fellowship of the gospel, they form there
by a true church, having all the power of Christ
to choose and ordain their officers. This is the
"church gathered." The officers are the natural
agents through whom the powers resident within
the church are exercised, and officers ought to be
chosen for the full settlement of church order.
But, without officers, a church has the power to
receive members, to excommunicate those found
deserving the penalty, and to hold services for
edification of prophesying and exhortation.1 The
sacraments of baptism and the Lord's Supper
could not be enjoyed without officers, however.
There is nothing in that fraternal and informal
life in Scrooby which demanded perfection of or
ganization by the choice of officers. It was a
company of men and women gathered under con
ditions similar to those under which the earliest
companies of Christian believers gathered. They
needed most of all a meeting-place where, in a
simple service, they might edify one another and
fortify the weaker members to endure persecution.
When they reached Amsterdam these conditions
changed. They needed to take their place as a
fully organized church along with the^other Eng-
1 "Justification of Separation," 2: 235.

98 JOHN ROBINSON
lish-speaking congregations in the city. Hence,
the conditions of the two locations give antecedent
probability to the very action which we have con
cluded did take place, the organization of the
church with officers for the first time in Amster
dam. The transition from the country life of England
to the confusion of a cosmopolitan city like Am
sterdam was a startling . change for the Scrooby
church. They were able, however, to find the
means of livelihood there more readily than they
could have done in a city that was not a seaport.
So far as the matter of self-support and freedom
of conscience were concerned they had found
Amsterdam admirably suited to their necessities.
There were other causes which made the place
untenable for permanent residence by a man whose
"vehement desire for peace" and passion for
righteousness were as strong as these motives were
with John Robinson. There was something in the
general moral condition of the city which led him
to fear for the welfare of his congregation. He
was obliged to admit "the hellish impieties" of
the city of Amsterdam during his time of residence
there. The greatest reason, however, which in
duced him to seek another place of residence for
his church was the hopeless condition of the sister

THE SCROOBY CONGREGATION 99
churches in the city. He was unable to do any
thing to pacify the factions in Smyth's company;
he saw the immediate prospect of renewed hos
tilities in the Ancient Church. So the newjoastor,
with his best counselors, began to look about for
another and a better environment.
The significance of this fact we must not fail
to observe. The history of the Separation up to
this time exhibits loyalty to conviction and clear
definition of principles. But the one thing lack
ing was a leader, wise, far-sighted, and strong
enough to take these principles, involving the
elements of danger that they did, and so embody
them in a practical enterprise that the true mean
ing of the Separatist theory would be evident.
Browne had failed; Barrow had failed; Johnson
had failed and was still failing; Smyth was mak
ing a miserable spectacle of his congregations in
Amsterdam. The Separation seemed doomed to
complete disaster unless a new champion should
appear. We have evidence from Robinson's writings
that he realized keenly the dangers involved in the
principles of the Separation.1 He believed that
the fundamental convictions of the Separatists
rested upon a deeper knowledge of the real
teachings of the Scriptures, a larger freedom in
'See Works, 3:99, 100.

100 JOHN ROBINSON
their application, and a more abundant zeal for
their embodiment in an institution, than the
principles underlying any other religious order.
This knowledge, freedom and zeal, however, if
unwisely employed by the Separatists, Robinson
told them very plainly would inevitably result
in the very contentions for which their foes con
demned them and which he deplored. But peace
is not a sign of knowledge; the peace of the
church was never so great as when it was in the
very midst of the deepest, darkest and densest
ignorance of popery. Knowledge must be guarded
with special watchfulness lest it engender strife.
So must zeal "be tempered with much wisdom,
moderation, and brotherly forbearance." And
only those who enjoy liberty know how hard it is
to use it aright. There is something in freedom
which begets strife unless this danger is resolutely
mastered. This keen analysis of the dangers in the Sepa
ration was not an academic exercise on Robin
son's part. He recognized these perils. He acted
in view of them. And at no point in his career
are his foresight and sound judgment more in
evidence than when he decided that it would be
impossible for him to realize the ideal of the
Separation in the environment of Amsterdam.

THE SCROOBY CONGREGATION 101
We are not sure of all the reasons that deter
mined him to seek Leyden, but one of them surely
was the fame of the great University, which was
one of the strongest in Europe at that time. The
disadvantage of the smaller city as a place of resi
dence on the practical side was perhaps overbal
anced by this. It was necessarily more difficult
for the Separatists to support themselves in Ley
den than it would have been in Amsterdam.
They petitioned for leave to settle in the fol
lowing form, which is recorded, perhaps somewhat
freely, in the language of the Clerk 1 in the Ley
den Court Registers: —
" To the Honorable the Burgomasters and Court
of the City of Leyden: With due submission and
respect: JAN ROBARTHSE, minister of the
Divine Word, and some of the members of the
Christian Reformed Religion, born in the King
dom of Great Britain, to the number of one hun
dred persons, or thereabouts, men and women,
represent that they are desirous of coming to live
in this city, by the first of May next, and to have
the freedom thereof in carrying on their trades,
without being a burden in the least, to any one.
They, therefore, address themselves to your Hon
ors, numbly praying that your Honors will be
1 The phrase "in this city" would indicate either this, or that the peti
tion was the work of some of Robinson's company then resident in
Leyden.

102 JOHN ROBINSON
pleased to grant them free consent to betake them
selves as aforesaid."
The Court acted on this petition on February
12, 1609, and declared that "the coming of the
memorialists will be agreable and welcome."
Two points are worthy of note. The first is
that, if Robinson reached Amsterdam in August,
1608, at about the same time with Clyfton, and
planned the removal to Leyden early in February,
1609, the space of six months suffices for him to
come to a clear knowledge of the Amsterdam con
ditions and determine upon the new plan.
The second is that the Scrooby brethren state
that they are in such financial condition or
masters of such trades that they will be no public
burden. We know, however, that they were not
rich, and that the struggle was a severe one for
them. We may conclude, therefore, that Robinson
had already organized his congregation for mutual
help in some way, and may infer a beginning of
those practical enterprises for the common good
of the congregation which we shall see taking
definite shape later, and which make the Scrooby
church quite unlike the other Separatist congre
gations of the time in the saving common sense
which they exhibited.
Before leaving Amsterdam Robinson wrote and

THE SCROOBY CONGREGATION 103
published the first tract that we have preserved
from his hand. There is this difference to be noted
between the Separatist movement in and about
London and that in the region of Gainsborough:
while the leaders of the former wrote and published
a great deal, the latter movement produced no
literature, so far as we know. One of the most
romantic episodes in the history of the Separation
is the manner in which the imprisoned leaders of
the Ancient London Church prepared the copy,
smuggled it to Holland and secured the publica
tion and distribution of their books.1 One reason
why this was possible was doubtless the ease with
which London could communicate with the con
tinent. The brethren in Gainsborough and Scrooby, on
the other hand, probably made no attempt at the
written defense of the Separation. At least we
have nothing preserved in the literature of the
movement there. Robinson only began to pub
lish when he had reached Holland.
It was a time when there was no such thing as
freedom of the press in England. Printing was
carried on chiefly in London, and was possible
elsewhere at only five places. In London the
ownership and use of type and a printing-press
1 See page 19.

104 JOHN ROBINSON
by persons not meeting the conditions of this
ownership was a crime punished by imprisonment.
These conditions were that, first of all, they should
have attained a certain rank in the "Company
of Stationers"; but, among these, the master
printers alone were allowed to have hand printing-
presses. In May, 1615, there were but nineteen
printing-shops for private printing in all London,
at the head of each one of which was a master
printer. But these nineteen men controlled only
thirty-three hand-presses. These presses were
locked up every night, and the work in each shop
v/as carefully investigated every week by offi
cers of the "Company of Stationers." Every
book was required to be licensed by a represen
tative of the Church and by one of the wardens
of the Company of Stationers before it could be
printed. Therefore, every book was under com
plete control of bishop and king.1
Under these circumstances it is not surpris
ing that we have nothing from the leaders of the
Separation about Gainsborough in the way of
printed writings. It is remarkable that we have
so much from the imprisoned Separatists in
London. In Amsterdam, however, Robinson was free.
1 See Arber, "Story of the Pilgrim Fathers," pp. 18-20.

THE SCROOBY CONGREGATION 105
And he began to write. We shall consider the
tract which he published there, and the large
treatise which he doubtless began there, in the
following chapter.
If the intention of the Scrooby church as ex
pressed in their petition to settle in Leyden was
carried out as regards time, they probably reached
their new home about the first of May, 1609.
Here John Robinson spent the remainder of his
life and did his noble work. To this work we shall
now turn our attention.

V
THE SEPARATION AS DEFINED AND
DEFENDED BY ROBINSON

CHAPTER V
THE SEPARATION AS DEFINED AND DEFENDED BY
ROBINSON
John Robinson was a Separatist. He reached
his decision after a time of intense struggle.
Having become convinced that the Separation
ought to be made, he became the resolute definer
and defender of the truth as he saw it. That
truth had been taught by Robert Browne and by '
Henry Barrow with different degrees of emphasis
laid upon one phase or another of it. Robinson
was called into controversy with the antagonists
of the Separation and made his peculiar con
tribution to the history of the movement as
his predecessors had done. It was a significant
contribution. It was made in the face of oppo
sition from both Anglican and Puritan writers.
The sources which we shall use are the brief reply
which he (Robinson) made to the Anglican,
Joseph Hall, and the most ambitious of his works,
the "Justification of Separation, " x against the
Puritan, Richard Bernard. We shall not dwell
1 This treatise occupies the entire second volume of Robinson's Works
as published in three volumes. It will be cited in the footnotes of this
chapter simply by the page to which reference is made.
109

110 JOHN ROBINSON
upon the detailed arguments, which are often
tedious and sometimes shallow; but we will take
up the outline of the Anglican Church order as
we have studied it briefly from the Canons of
1603-4, display the general scope of Robinson's
attack upon it, and then exhibit the positive and
constructive side of his work in his conception of
the true church according to the New Testament
model. It was sometime during the year 1608 that
Joseph Hall, an able minister of the Church of
England, and later one of her bishops, who had
learned something of Browne 's doctrines while in
Middelburg, and had also heard of the Separation
around Gainsborough, addressed a letter to John
Smyth and John Robinson as the "Ringleaders"
of the movement. John Robinson replied to
this letter by "An Answer to a Censorious
Epistle," which is preserved in the reply to
it made by Hall under the title, "A Common
Apologie of the Church of England." Robinson
wrote the reply to Hall's letter while he was in
Amsterdam, and also sent it out from that city.
It is a tract which interests us chiefly from the
fact that it is the first writing of Robinson which
remains to us, and that it shows him in the light
of a thoroughgoing Separatist.

SEPARATION DEFINED IU
The second source exhibits fully the position
of Robinson as a champion of the Separation.
It is entitled, "A Justification of Separation
from the Church of England against Mr. Richard
Bernard his Invective, entitled The Separatist's
Schisme." It was begun at Amsterdam during
the year of residence there, and finished and pub
lished in Leyden in 1610. Rev. Richard Bernard,
in reply to whose book, "Christian Advertise
ments and Counsels of Peace," it was written,
was a vicar of the Church of England, whose
parish was Worksop, in the neighborhood of
Scrooby, and who 'had personally known both
Smyth and Robinson there. At times he had
seemed on the point of becoming a Separatist,
but he had always returned to conformity to the
Church of England. Yet he was a Puritan, and
wrote arguments against the ceremonies which
were imposed upon the church by the Prayer-
Book. From these two sources, therefore, we may ex
pect a fair view of the arguments for the Separa
tion as they were urged against both the Anglican
and the Puritan by John Robinson.
From the perspective of the present, this debate
over the reasons for the Separation cannot appear
to us so important or so interesting as a later

112 JOHN ROBINSON
controversy concerning the extent of Christian
communion which we shall take up. But at the
time this large book on the Separation was Rob
inson's most important work. He probably
rated it as the greatest service which he performed
for the cause he loved and defended. And, if
we seek sympathetically to enter into it, we shall
find the study of its arguments and propositions
a matter of vital interest.
Before we turn to these let us notice the temper
of the time in respect to controversy. When
Robinson took up his pen in defense of the
Separation it was not for the pleasure of a scho
lastic exercise. He had suffered; so had his peo
ple. Those were not soft times. It was an age
of invective and unsparing rebuke because it
was a time when opinions were a matter of life
and death. Men did not make apologies as a
preliminary exercise to the process of decapita
tion; they struck quickly and fiercely, intending to
give fatal blows. This is the quality of argument
which we find in these discussions. Robinson's
temper is gracious, and his terms are generous,
in comparison with many of his contemporaries.
But there is no little harshness in his method
as he deals with his opponents.
On the negative side, let us review his attack

SEPARATION DEFINED 113
upon the Church of England, as we have already
studied it at the close of Chapter I.
So far as the royal supremacy is concerned,
Robinson is an Englishman, loyal to the core to
the king. He says,
" The King indeed is to govern in causes eccle
siastical, but civilly, not ecclesiastically, using the
civil sword, not the spiritual, for the punishing of
offenders.1
Hence the king is not the head of a national
church, holding a unique position. If he is a
church officer, he is called to that office and may
be deposed from it by the church. He is, then,
only a ruling elder and inferior in position to a
teaching elder. Robinson does not discuss the
question at length, since he is far more deeply
concerned with the office of the bishop. But, in
spite of his loyalty to the monarch, his denial of
the validity of a national church sweeps away
the doctrines of the royal supremacy, as it was
commonly held.
Then he denies the apostolic character of the
Church of England. He shows how different
the method of gathering the apostolic Church
was from that by which the Church of England
was brought together. When Christ and the
'Page 278.

114 JOHN ROBINSON
apostles gathered the true Church of the New
Testament, "they did not by the co-active laws of men
shuffle together good and bad; as intending a
new monster or chimera, but admitted of such,
and none other, as confesssed their sin and jus
tified God, as were not of the world, but chosen
out of it."1
The New Testament Church was composed of
"saints." Against this argument both Hall and Bernard
replied that, while this was doubtless true, there
were yet wicked members in the churches even
in the apostles' day, and this fact did not make
them false churches. The abuses at Corinth did
not make it necessary for the true Christians in
Corinth to separate from the church there and
form a new one of their own.
We come here to a critical point in the entire
Separatist position. Robinson takes it up fully
in his replies to both his opponents. He admits
that there were wicked members in the apostolic
churches, and that this fact did not make it nec
essary for those who were holy in those churches
to separate from them. But, when this is made
a warrant for remaining^in'the Church of England,
1 Page 121.

SEPARATION DEFINED 115
there is this essential difference to be observed,
which makes the Anglican argument of no value.
These apostolic churches had the power resident
within them, the power of Christ given to the
members of the church, to purify themselves
and to reform abuses. But in the Church of
England this power exists no longer, having been
usurped by the bishops and the church thus
robbed of that which makes it a true church,
that is, the power to reform itself. We must not
lose the force of this argument. It has an ethi
cal basis; it roots in the demand for righteous
ness. For the early Separatists it was decisive.
It was not the mingling of good and bad in the
national church, but the fact that, under the
episcopal order, the power of self-purification
lodged by God with the people was lost, which
drove John Robinson into Separation.
What, then, was the real ground of this Sep
aration, against which the canons pronounced
such censure, and concerning which Joseph Hall
wrote to Robinson, "even murders shall abide
an easier answer than separation"? Ainsworth
had held that the separation was from the cor
ruptions in the church and not from the corrupt
church. Hall thought at the outset that this
was Robinson's position, and, therefore, did not

116 JOHN ROBINSON
class him as a thorough Separatist. But Rob
inson takes the ground in his "Answer" that
the separation is not from certain corruptions
which are manifest chiefly in the ceremonies,
but from the church itself, which is essentially
corrupt because of the wickedness within it which
it is impotent to reform. Hall, therefore, in
his "Apologie" brands Robinson as a complete
Brownist. This position is elaborated in the
discussion with Bernard. It is in reality another
statement of the old principle of "connivance
at sin." When Bernard asks why Robinson can
not remain within that church where his con
version took place, and expend his zeal there for
its purification, the answer is that Separation
from that church is necessary in order to avoid
personal sin. He says,
" But this I hold, that if iniquity be committed
in the church, and complaint and proof accord
ingly made, and that the church will not reform
or reject the party offending, but will on the
contrary maintain presumptuously and abet such
impiety, that then, by abetting that party and
his sin, she makes it her own by imputation and
enwraps herself in the same guilt with the sinner.
And remaining irreformable either by such mem
bers of the said church as are faithful, or by
other sister churches, wipeth herself out of the

SEPARATION DEFINED 117
Lord's Church-roll, and now ceaseth to be any
longer the true church of Christ.' n
Exactly this condition, Robinson maintained,
existed in the Church of England as it was then
constituted. Separation, therefore, was not a
form of registering a protest against the cere
monies prescribed by the Prayer-Book or the
form of church government by bishops. It was
a necessity in order to avoid personal sin. The
extent to which the Separation must be carried
we will notice later when we consider more fully
Robinson's positive teaching.
So far as the creed named in the canons was
concerned, Robinson was ready to accept the
Thirty-nine Articles, or the older Forty-two.
He charged Hall with the fact that erroneous
heresies concerning free will were stealing in
among the ministers of the Church of England,
but he did not enter into any discussion of dogma
as distinct from polity. He acknowledged "many
excellent truths of doctrine, which we also teach
without commixture of error," in the Church
of England. But Robinson maintained that the
order of the church was an essential part of any
body of doctrine. He said:
"Since Jesus Christ, not only as priest and
1 Page 260.

118 JOHN ROBINSON
prophet, but as king, is the foundation of his
church; and that the visible church is the King
dom of Christ; the doctrines touching the sub
jects, government, officers, and laws of the church
can be no less than fundamental doctrines of the
same church or kingdom."1
And again,
"The order which Christ hath left in the Evan
gelists, Acts, and Epistles to Timothy and Titus,
is a part of the Gospel and the object of faith
as much as any other part of it."2
It is often said that the entire Separatist con
tention was concerning polity and not concern
ing theology, as if, after all, the Separation was
made on the ground of an external quibble in
stead of being based upon something which was
essential, involving faith, and utterly necessary
to the existence of a true church. Robinson was
perfectly clear on this point. Polity was a part
of a divinely given body of truth. Apart from
any question of the right or wrong of their con
viction, it must be clear that the Separation
was made by men who believed that church pol
ity was as much an essential part of church doc
trine, and as much an object of faith, as the Being
of God or the Person of Christ. The question of
the true order of the church was not a matter
1 Page 397. 2 Pages 22, 287.

SEPARATION DEFINED 119
of external form or accidence ; it was fundamental
and worth contending for at the risk of life itself.
We will dismiss very briefly Robinson's at
tack upon the Church of England. The idea of
a national church, he maintains, is the attempt
to return to the Old Testament order, which
has been done away with forever by the insti
tution of the order laid down by Christ and the
apostles in the New Testament. In that order
there is no trace whatever of the prelatic system
employed in the government of the Church of
England. " Your grand metropolitans, your arch
bishops, bishops, suffragans, deans, archdeacons,
chancellors, officials, and the residue of that
lordly clergy" 1 find no warrant in the simple
church order of Christ and the apostles. The
parish system is also repugnant to the idea of
the church as a communion of saints. "With
what conscience," he asks, "can any man plead
the saintship of all that godless crew in the Eng
lish assemblies?" The Anglican worship, too, is
false, since the ceremonies of the Prayer-Book
have usurped the highest place, and the preach
ing of the Word, which is the supreme function
of worship, is omitted because of the inability
of the Anglican ministers in a vast number of
parishes. 1 Page 171.

120 JOHN ROBINSON
Robinson's attack, which is often harsh, but
generally less venomous than was the custom
in his day, is pretty well fortified by citing the
witness of men whose books he possessed, or by
appeals to his own knowledge of the conditions
in such parishes as Worksop.
We have passed hastily the negative side of
Robinson's argument, in order that we might
devote more space to the positive and construct
ive teaching which appears everywhere in his
writings. For, while Robinson is intense in his
controversy, he is not merely destructive. He
defends his positions by maintaining positive
doctrine rather than by wholesale attack upon
his opponents.
Let us look at his conception of the true church.
It is drawn entirely from his definition of the
perfect model in the New Testament. The exi
gencies of controversy lead him to emphasize
one or another of the elements in the definition
at different times; but he preserves it through
out in these general terms:
"A company, consisting though but of two or
three, separated from the world, whether un
christian or antichristian, and gathered into
the name of Christ bv a covenant made to walk

SEPARATION DEFINED 121
in all the ways of God known unto them, is a
church, and so hath the whole power of Christ.' n
First, then, the true church is an individual
congregation. Robinson bases this claim upon
the fact that Jesus and the apostles in the begin
ning —
"appointed none other true visible churches
but particular congregations of faithful people."2
The subject matter of the church is persons
who have separated themselves from the world,
that is, are "saints." The regenerate character
of the persons forming the true Church is set
over against the condition of the parishes in the
Church of England in sharp contrast.
But this company of "saints" is not merely
united by the simple spiritual bond which must
link all believers according to the necessary affini
ties of their life in Christ. They are "gathered"
into companies for communion and mutual help
fulness. The true church exists in an organized
company. The bond in this organization is not allegiance
to any system of church government or group
of officers. It is a covenant with 'God, who is
the source of all light and the object of all love,
to walk in his ways. We must not fail to notice
1 Page 132. 2 Page 388.

122 JOHN ROBINSON
the terms of the Scrooby covenant. It does
not consider the revelation of God's will as yet
perfectly made. Those early Separatists cove
nanted to walk in all his ways "made known,
or to be made known" unto them. They were
going to school to God. The windows were open
to the light. Their faces were set forward. That
splendid covenant stands as an open challenge
to every one who charges the Pilgrim Fathers
with bigotry and hardness.
And lastly, this single congregation, thus united
in covenant, has the whole power which Christ
gave his Church, lodged within itself. No man
or body of men, no state or assembly, is to do
for it what God has equipped it to do for itself.
It is to choose its minister and ordain him; it is
to receive or expel its members; it is to endow
its ordained officers with the power to admin
ister the sacraments.
This is the Church of the Separation standing
out in marked contrast with the elaborate eccle
siastical system outlined in the Canons of 1603-
04. We must notice at this point Robinson's posi
tion concerning polity, as defining his place among
the leaders of the Separation. It turns on the
discussion of where the "ruling power of Christ"

SEPARATION DEFINED 123
is placed. The starting-point of the discussion is
Bernard's statement that
"the Papists plant the ruling power of Christ
in the Pope; the Protestants, in the bishops;
the Puritans, in the presbytery; the Brownists,
in the body of the congregation, the multitude
called the church."
Robinson's general teaching concerning polity
may be grouped to advantage about this state
ment. In the first place, he resents any insinuation
that the elders do not fully exercise the func
tions of government in the Separatist congrega
tions. He says,
"We profess the bishops, or elders, to be the
only ordinary governors of the church." 1
He then proposes a medley of polity, wandering
in the dark toward what we should now term
democracy. There are, he claims, three kinds of
polity for the church which are good and lawful:
"monarchical, where supreme authority is in the
hands of one; aristocratical, when it is in the
hands of some few select persons; and demo-
cratical, in the whole body or multitude. And
all these three forms have their places in the
Church of Christ. In respect of him, the Head,
it is a monarchy ; in respect of the eldership, an
1 Page 7.

124 JOHN ROBINSON
aristocracy; in respect of the body, a popular
state."1 This is not a new idea. In the fourth Martin
Marprelate tract of 1588-89 the same general
thought had been advanced. But Robinson car
ries it out fully. In the first place, although the
"Lord Jesus is the King of his Church alone,
upon whose shoulders the government is, and unto
whom all power is given in heaven and earth,"
he has nevertheless communicated this power to
the members of the church, making each mem
ber a prophet, to teach; a priest, to offer the
spiritual sacrifice of praise and prayer for him
self and others; and a king, to guide and govern
himself and others in the ways of godliness. Thus
the power of Christ is imparted directly to the
members of the church. But just as the exigen
cies of actual government might bring a multitude
of kings together to consult concerning common
interests and administer their mutual affairs, in
which case they would choose and appoint some
few to be over them for the purpose of the
orderly administration of those affairs, "so in
this royal assembly, the Church of Christ, though
all be kings," yet some are set over the rest to
govern in an office which is a service of ministry.
1 Page 140.

SEPARATION DEFINED 125
Thus arises in the church, from the demo
cratic function lodged within it by God the King,
the aristocracy of the presbytery.
"The Lord Jesus," says Robinson, "hath given
to his church a presbyter}'-, or college of elders or
bishops ... for the teaching and governing of
the whole flock according to his will; and these
the multitude, jointly and severally, is bound to
obey, all and every one of them. " :
But it is one thing for the officers to govern the
church and the people to be bound to obey them;
it is quite another thing to say " the church is the
officers." The latter statement Robinson repudi
ates. The power of the officers is given to them
" mediately by Christ from the church. "
And yet, near as this is to democracy, Robin
son is so anxious to defend himself and his church
from the charge of "anarchy" and "confusion,"
that he is unwilling to allow the Separatist polity
to be called "democratic." Although he asserts
that in the church all have equal power and voice,
the officers only guiding them in their action, as
is the case of the speaker in the House of Com
mons, yet he expressly says,
" The external church government under Christ,
the only mediator and monarch thereof, is plainly
1 Page 142.

126 JOHN ROBINSON
aristocratical, and to be administered by some
certain choice men, although the state, which
many unskilfully confound with the government,
be after a sort popular and democratical." 1
Here appears one of those fine distinctions which
we shall find sometimes appearing at critical
junctures in Robinson's writing. The Church,
in its ideal relation to its invisible Head, is a
monarchy; in the authority which it possesses
and exercises, it is a democracy; but its external
system of government is an aristocracy, the elders
being the chosen agents for the exercise of the
ruling power of Christ. This was Robinson's
theory. Before we can classify his position in
relation to Barrow and Browne, however, we
must see how he organized his church practically
in Leyden.
The church comes first; then the officers are
chosen; and a company of Christian believers
gathered into covenant relations may be called
a church even if they have no officers. We have
called attention to this point in discussing the
matter of the complete organization of the Scrooby
church in Amsterdam.
Looking at the New Testament model, Robin
son finds that there were five classes of officers
1 "Just and Necessary Apology, " Works, 3: 42.

SEPARATION DEFINED 127
appointed for it. These were apostles, prophets,
evangelists, pastors and teachers. The first three
were temporary. The last two are permanent.
Pastors and teachers may be assigned to par
ticular congregations only. They may both be
called elders or bishops. The pastor is ruling
elder; the teacher, teaching elder. Of these the
teaching elder is far more important than the
ruling elder; even the king himself, as a ruling
elder, would be inferior to the teaching elder of
a church. There is no such thing as a ministry
at large; the minister of a congregation ceases to
be a minister if the congregation be dissolved.
There is no such thing as an "order" of the
ministry. The minister (either pastor or teacher)
is one of the brethren and does not cease to be a
brother in the church when chosen to his office.
He must possess the mental and spiritual quali
fications for such an office, be examined, chosen
and ordained by the church, and be subject to
their censures in case of misconduct or infidelity.
In concluding this study of the grounds of the
Separation we must observe to what extent it
was to be carried. We have seen already that,
after an intense struggle, Robinson reached his
decision for the Separation and went to Gains
borough, where he found John Smyth carrying

128 JOHN ROBINSON
his doctrine to the bitter end, and insisting upon
a complete withdrawal from every act of religious
communion, even to the extent of reading the
Scriptures and private prayer, between the Sep
aratists and members of the Church of England.
It was on this account that Robinson refused
to join Smyth and later cast his fortunes with
the Scrooby brethren. We should, therefore, ex
pect to find him, in these- first controversies,
maintaining the same position which he had held
against Smyth. We are no little surprised, then,
to discover him an advocate of the rigid Separa
tion in his debate with Bernard. Two of the
errors which Bernard charged against the Sepa
ratists were that they refused to hear any min
isters of the Church of England preach, and that
they held it to be unlawful to join in prayer with
any of them.
Robinson defends the Separatists in this respect.
He says,
"Communion is a matter of order or relation;
the holiness of a man's person is not sufficient
[warrant] for communion, but withal it must
be ranged into the order of a church, wherein
both his person and actions must combine."
Therefore, he concludes,
"we ought to communicate both in prayer, and

SEPARATION DEFINED 129
in all the other ordinances of God, with all God's
children, except they themselves hinder it, or
put a bar; which we are persuaded they in the
Church of England do, in choosing rather the
communion of all the profane rout in the Kingdom
under the prelates' tyranny, than the communion
of saints, which Christ hath established under his
government."1 And so, although the ground is not covered by
any lengthy argument for the practice, Robinson
here commits himself to the rigid Separation.
We turn, therefore, to seek the reason for this
change. He gives it himself in the preface of a
treatise issued in 1614, in which he returned to
his first position. Here he says concerning his
argument with Bernard,
"Indeed afterwards [that is, after his election
as pastor of the Scrooby church, when he was
objected to by members of John Smyth's church
on the ground that he was not a rigid Separatist]
finding them of other churches, with whom I
was most nearly joined [in Amsterdam], other
wise minded for the most part, I did, through
my vehement desire of peace, and weakness
withal, remit and lose of my former resolution;
and did, to speak as the truth is, forget some
of my former grounds; and so have passed out
upon occasion some arguments against this prac-
1 Pages 463, 464.

130 JOHN ROBINSON
tice [of communion in private prayer with mem
bers of the Church of England]." 1
It was the force of personal influence, there
fore, on the part of the Separatist leaders in Am
sterdam, supplemented by a temper which was
strongly given to all that would make for peace,
which brought Robinson to make this change.
He was never heartily convinced of the truth of
the new position, he tells us; and he made the
mistake of yielding for the sake of what seemed
the deeper harmony of the Separatist churches.
It is a noble confession of error which he makes
in the later treatise. We shall have occasion
to refer to this again when we study his individ
ual contribution to the Separation in his epoch-
making discussion on this very matter of religious
communion. At this point we see him sacri
ficing a conviction in the interests of peace. That
policy always fails. We shall see it fail with him.
1 "Of Religious Communion," Works, 3: 102.

VI
SETTLEMENT IN LEYDEN

CHAPTER VI
SETTLEMENT IN LEYDEN
The journey from Amsterdam to Leyden, in
the glorious spring of the year, was neither long
nor arduous. The indication of the petition to
the city authorities is that members of the church
had already settled in Leyden, where they had
made the arrangements for the removal, and
where they would be ready to welcome their
comrades upon their arrival. This was the nat
ural plan, for Robinson in every instance remained
behind until the last of his congregation, the
feeblest and oldest, were ready to move.
Dr. Griffis, in his book, "The Pilgrims in
Their Three Homes," has given a pen picture
of the journey between the cities:
"We can imagine the little flotilla freighted
with household goods and crowded with plainly
and soberly dressed English people, conspicuous
among whom was the dignified John Robinson.
In clerical garb, and wearing a cap which looked
exactly like a watermelon cut in half, with per
haps a little band of lace around the bottom,
133

134 JOHN ROBINSON
and wearing also a ruff around his neck, he would
be easily recognized."1
On reaching the new home, Robinson was
face to face with the problem of self-support for
his people. They were farmers, and therefore
could not quickly set themselves to profitable
employment. At the same time they had prob
ably increased their difficulties by removing to
a city which furnished less variety in occupation
than Amsterdam had afforded. They must keep
together as a company, which would have been
impossible if they had gone outside the city to
engage in agriculture. Thus the conditions of
their life were hard. But there is little complaint
about this in any of Robinson's writings. The
church seems to have been united to a wonderful
degree in its purpose, and practical wisdom pre
vailed in its counsels. As Bradford says, they
were men "valewing peace and their spirituall
comforte above any other riches whatsoever." 2
And their thrift and happiness enabled them fin
ally to establish themselves in Leyden in circum
stances of tolerable comfort.
The trades to which the people set their hands
were those connected with the manufacture of
1 "The Pilgrims in Their Three Homes," p. 85.
2 " Of Plimoth Plantation," pp. 23, 24.

SETTLEMENT IN LEYDEN 135
all kinds of woven goods. The preparation of
the raw material and the manufacture of the goods
were carried on in small factories, or more often
in the homes of the toilers. The industrial revo
lution and the growth of the factory had not
then taken place. It was in these small indus
tries connected with the manufacture of woolen
goods that the people gained their livelihood.
We cannot determine accurately the part of
the city in which the Scrooby brethren settled,
but it probably was in the newer and, there
fore, cheaper sections, which began to be opened
up when the Great Truce between the Dutch
patriots and their enemies gave assurance that
for at least twelve years there would be a cessa
tion in the horrors of war through which Leyden
had passed.
The peace of the city was evident not only
industrially, but religiously. There was a Pres
byterian church in the city, whose membership
was made up of English and Scotch residents.
This was established about the time that the
Separatists reached Leyden, and its minister
until 1616 was Rev. Robert Durie. They were
granted a place of worship by the authorities.
It was generally supposed at one time that
the Scrooby brethren were also given a place

136 JOHN ROBINSON
of worship in Leyden by the magistrates. This
rested upon references in Winslow 's "Brief Narra
tion" and Prince's ' 'Annals' ' (1736). The matter
was sifted thoroughly by George Sumner,1 and the
unreliability of the witnesses to any such thing
has been established. The influence of King James
was very strong in Holland. Reference will be
made later to the manner in which the Dutch
authorities sought to carry out the wishes of the
English king in the matter of the arrest of Wil
liam Brewster. The records of the city during
the years of Robinson's residence there are com
plete, and there is no notice of any petition for
a place of worship from the church, although
the petition to immigrate is given. Indeed,
there seems to have been quite another plan in
Robinson's mind. This was to obtain a place
large enough to serve both as his own residence
and as a meeting place for his church. This plan
he was evidently unable to carry out at once
on his arrival in Leyden. We have no informa
tion as to where he lived before he entered the
large house, the purchase of which is recorded
in the following deed :
We, PIETER ARENTSZOON DEYMAN and
1 See Mass. Hist. Soe. Coll., Series 3, Vol. 9, pp. 42-74, "Memoirs of the
.Pilgrims in Leyden, " and Proceedings, Vol. 18, p. 210.

SETTLEMENT IN LEYDEN 137
AMELIS VAN HOGEVEEN, Schepens [mag
istrates] in Leyden, make known that before us
came JOHAN DE LALAING, declaring, for him
self and his heirs, that he had sold, and by these
presents does sell, to JAN ROBINSZOON, Min
ister of GOD'S Word of the English Congrega
tion in this city, WILLEM JEPSON, HENRY
WOOD and RAYNULPH TICKENS, who has
married JANE WHITE — jointly and each for
himself an equal fourth part — a house and ground,
with a garden situated on the west side thereof,
standing and being in this city on the south side
of the Pieter 's Kerckhoff near the Belfry; for
merly called the Groene Port."
This is the first paragraph of the deed,1 which
was witnessed and sealed on May 5, 1611. There
are two items especially to be noticed here. Rob
inson's name is associated with those of three
members of his congregation in the enterprise.
He seems to be the leader in the undertaking, as
his name comes first. The entire project was
undoubtedly carried through in the interests of
the whole congregation, and formed one item in
that large scheme for the permanence and wel
fare of his people which Robinson always kept
in view. The other noteworthy incident is the
mention of the fact in connection with the name
1 The whole is printed in Arber, ' Story of the Pilgrim Fathers, "pp.
156-157.

138 JOHN ROBINSON
of Thickens or Tickens that he had married Jane
White. What reason can there be for this? The
names of other wives are not given in the deed.
Thickens was Robinson's brother-in-law, having
married Jane White, sister to Mrs. Robinson,
whose maiden name was Bridget White. The
conjecture has been made that Jane White's
name is mentioned in this deed for the reason
that her husband's share of the purchase money
was understood to come from her. If this is so it
would imply that Robinson's wife may also have
been the possessor of money in her own right.
The whole matter, however, is merely speculation.
The price of this property was eight thousand
guilders, of which two thousand were paid clown
and the promise given that five hundred should
be paid yearly, beginning in May, 1612, until
the entire balance should be liquidated. This
total sum was equal to about sixteen thousand
dollars of our present American money. The
first payment, therefore, was about four thousand
dollars, of which John Robinson's equal share
was one thousand dollars. The location of this
property was most advantageous. It was over
against the great Peter's Church, near the mili
tary headquarters of the city, and very close to
the University. At the rear was the chapel of

SETTLEMENT IN LEYDEN 139
the Veiled Nuns' Cloister, where the congregation
of Rev. Robert Durie met for worship, and on
the upper floor of which the library of the great
University was then placed. Also the land in
the rear of the house was well adapted to the
arrangement of a "hof," where small houses
are built about a central court and the little com
munity composed of their inhabitants is screened
from public view. With Robinson, in the enter
prise, was associated a carpenter, William Jep-
son, and the erection of twenty-one small houses
about the court was begun. Doubtless in these
lived Separatist families which were in greater
need of help than others. But, in spite of this
paternal arrangement, we must not think of
Robinson as here setting up any of those commu
nistic schemes which men like the Anabaptists,
and others who laid great emphasis upon the New
Testament model of the true Church, have erected
from time to time with such disaster to their
cause. Robinson's writings are free from any
hint at such a theory. The Separatists were a
brotherhood, bound by their covenant and by
the hardness of their experience, to help one
another. But their pastor was a far-sighted
and well-balanced man, who was not led into
excess of literalness in application, however he

140 JOHN ROBINSON
valued the New Testament model. In fact, his
interpretation of the New Testament model was
the true one. For "the so-called communism
of primitive Christianity was simply the glad, free,
domestic relationship of generous aid and serv
ice, such as any modern Christian congregation
might legitimately strive to imitate. It did not
abolish distinctions of rich and poor, still less
did it enter the sphere of productive industry.
Its economics were those of a loving family."1
This was the principle which Robinson sought
to embody in his practical enterprise in Bell Alley.
It was, like his controversies, judicious, clear
sighted and fraternal. The pastor of the Pil
grim Fathers was a wise organizer.
And now, that we may get a clear picture of
the Leyden church in its permanent home in
Bell Alley, let us listen to the quaint, sincere
description of one of its strongest and most de
voted members, which is here reproduced in its
original spelling:
Being thus setled (after many difficulties)
they continued many years in a comfortable
condition, injoying much sweete & delightefull
societie & spirituall comforte togeather in ye
wayes of God, under ye able ministrie, and pru-
dente governmente of Mr. John Robinson, &
1 F. G. Peabody, "Jesus Christ and the Social Question," 1900, p. 24

SETTLEMENT IN LEYDEN 141
Mr. William Brewster, who was an assistante
unto him in ye place of an Elder, unto which
he was now called & chosen by the church. So
as they grew in knowledge & other gifts & graces
of ye spirite of God, & lived togeather in peace
& love, and holines; and many came unto them
from diverse parts of England, so as they grew
a great congregation. And if at any time any
differences arose, or offences broak out (as it
cannot be, but some time ther will, even amongst
ye best of men) they were ever so mete with,
and nipt in ye head betims, or otherwise so well
composed, as still love, peace, and communion
was continued; or els ye church purged of those
that were incurable & incorrigible, when, after
much patience used, no other means would serve,
which seldom came to pass. Yea such was
ye mutuall love, & reciprocall respecte that this
worthy man had to his flocke, and his flocke to
him, that it might be said of them as it once was
of y* famouse Emperour Marcus Aurelious, and
ye people of Rome, that it was hard to judge
wheather he delighted more in haveing shuch a
people, or they in haveing such a pastor. His
love was greate towards them, and his care was
all ways bente for their best good, both for soule
and body; for besides his singuler abilities in
devine things (wherein he excelled), he was also
very able to give directions in civili affaires, and
to foresee dangers & inconveniences; by woh
means he was very helpfull to their outward estats

142 JOHN ROBINSON
& so was every way as a commone father unto
them. And none did more offend him then those
that were close and cleaving to themselves, and
retired from ye commoe good; as also such as
would be stifle & riged in matters of outward
order, and invey against ye evills of others, and
yet be remisse in them selves, and not so carefull
to express a vertuous conversation. They in
like maner had ever a reverente regard unto
him, & had him in precious estimation, as his
worth & wisdom did deserve; and though they
esteemed him highly whilst he lived & laboured
amongst them, yet much more after his death,
when they came to feele ye wante of his help, and
saw (by woefull experience) what a treasure
they had lost, to ye greefe of their harts, and
wounding of their sowls; yea such a loss as they
saw could not be repaired; for it was as hard
for them to find such another leader and feeder
in all respects, as for ye Taborits to find another
Ziska. And though they did not call themselves
orphans, as the other did, after his death, yet
they had cause as much to lamente, in another
regard, their present condition, and after usage.
But to returne; I know not but it may be spoken
of ye honour of God, & without prejudice to any,
that such was ye true pietie, ye humble zeale,
& fervent love, of this people (whilst they thus
lived together) towards God and his waies, and
ye single hartednes .& sinceir affection one to
wards another, that they came as near ye prim-
ative patterne of ye first churches, as any other

SETTLEMENT IN LEYDEN 143
church of these later times have done, according
to their ranke & qualitie. 1
After the house in Bell Alley had been purchased,
Robinson lived there with his growing family of
children. We have no satisfactory data from
which we can determine either the date of Rob
inson's marriage or the ages of his children. Mrs.
Robinson's maiden name was Bridget White.
Her sister Jane married Randall Thickens. Dr.
Henry M. Dexter conjectures 2 that another sister
of Mrs. Robinson, Frances White, married Francis
Jessop in Worksop, not far from Gainsborough,
January 24, 1605. There is nothing certain about
this, however.
We are a little clearer concerning the names
and number of Robinson's children. We have
a tax Ust of the year 1622 which shows us that
Robinson's family was the only one occupying
the house itself. The list is as follows:
John Robinson, preacher; Bridget Robinson,
his wife; their children, John, Bridget, Isaac,
Mercy, Fear, James; Mary Hardy, a servant
maid. " 3
The existence of the university must have
1 Bradford, "Of Plimoth Plantation," pp. 24-26.
2 "Congregationalism as Seen," p. 378.
3 Griffis, "Pilgrims in their Three Homes," p. 240.

144 JOHN ROBINSON
been one of the strong attractions of Leyden for
Robinson. And yet, he was not admitted to
its privileges for some time after his arrival in
the city. This is in marked contrast with the
case of Rev. Robert Durie, the minister of the
Presbyterian church that worshiped in the chapel
close by the Robinson house. On April 27, 1610,
Durie was matriculated, and is described as Min
ister of the English Church. But it was not until
September 5, 1615, that Robinson was admitted
as a student of theology, and in the records of
the university he is described simply as "an
Englishman." This serves to show still more
plainly that the Separatists never received offi
cial recognition as a church by the Dutch. The
fear of giving "offence to ye state of England"
was sufficient to prevent any public favor. Mem
bership in the university brought with it privi
leges of a literary and social nature which would
be of value to Robinson. It also freed him from
the duty of acting on patrol in time of war, and
gave him the privilege of brewing a certain amount
of beer without paying a tax. But the greatest
privilege was the freedom which it gave him from
liability to arrest by any except the officers of
the university. This never served him any in
practical life, but it might have done so had any

SETTLEMENT IN LEYDEN 145
of his books incurred the severe displeasure of
King James.
Meantime the church affairs were prospering
and peace prevailed in the councils of the congre
gation. And the church came very soon to rep
resent a definite phase of thought and practice
which was the result of its pastor's leadership.
It still bore close relationships with Amsterdam;
it worked out and pursued a policy of its own.
In the succeeding chapters we shall study these
elements in the Leyden life in order to determine
John Robinson's real place in the history of the
Congregational churches.

VII
THE CHAMPION OF CALVINISM

CHAPTER VII
THE CHAMPION OF CALVINISM
We have followed the story of Robinson's life
through the storm and stress of his decision for
the Separation; we have seen him rise to a posi
tion of leadership in the suffering congregation
gathered about Scrooby; we have witnessed his
foresight in Amsterdam after he had become the
head of the exiled church; we have discovered
the signs of his strong personal command of the
situation of the growing church in Leyden. Back
of all this expanding influence lay a theological
conviction, brought into definite system by for
mal statement. Robinson defined and defended a
system of church polity. He was also the cham
pion of a system of theology. In this chapter
it is not necessary to enter into any detailed
examination of Robinson's theological positions.
The main question that interests us is, rather,
Do the purely theological teachings of Robinson
display any signs of change ?
Robinson stood ready to accept the Thirty-
nine Articles of the Church of England, with that
149

150 JOHN ROBINSON
Calvinistic interpretation which they will bear
and which he gave to them. There are sources,
however, from which we can draw much more
fully in arriving at an adequate conception of his
whole system of theology.
The first of these is his treatise, "Of Religious
Communion," the larger part of which is con
cerned with an answer to two books by Thomas
Helwisse. One of these books, "A Declaration
of the Faith of the English People remaining at
Amsterdam," sets forth the creed of the Baptist
church formed by John Smyth there, of which
Helwisse was chosen pastor after Smyth's death
in 1609. This "Declaration" was published in
1611. Robinson's reply appeared in 1614.
The second source is a reply to a book by John
Murton, "A Description of what God hath pre
destinated concerning Man," published in 1620.
Murton here attacks the Calvinistic theology of
the creed sanctioned by the Synod of Dort, and
specifically attempts to overthrow Robinson's posi
tion in relation to baptism.
Robinson answered this with "A Defence of
the Doctrine propounded by the Synod at Dort,"
published in 1624. We must remember that the
fact of Robinson's championship of the truth
embodied in this particular creed is not nee-

THE CHAMPION OF CALVINISM 151
essarily due to his belief that this was the one
perfect and unalterable expression of the last
word to be said upon Christian doctrine. This
is a controversy and he is defending the specific
cause attacked by his opponents, which, in this
case, was the creed of the Synod of Dort.
Between these two sources there lies a period
of ten years, during the early part of which Rob
inson passed through certain radical changes of
opinion regarding the practice of the Christian
life. In theology, however, there is no radical
change. The main positions urged against Hel
wisse in 1614 are those maintained against Murton
in 1624.
Let us look at these very briefly. It is a strug
gle between the ideas of God's absolute sover
eignty and the complete freedom of the will,
the conflict between high Calvinism and protest
ing Arminianism. It is not a struggle involving
mere opinions in speculative theology; it is a
war between religious dogmas which are insepa
rably linked with political policies and the destiny
of the state. It is, therefore, necessary to bear
in mind the political as well as the religious sit
uation. Beginning at the central point of the theology,
the sovereignty of God, let us follow Robinson

152 JOHN ROBINSON
in a somewhat hasty fashion, in order that we
may see not only what he believed, but the rea
sons upon which he seemed to himself warranted
in resting his faith.
The matter of God's decrees touching sin comes
up for immediate treatment.
"God hath not only foreseen and determined
the issues and events of His works, but hath also
decreed and purposed the works themselves before
the foundation of the world. " l
"The condemnation of wicked men by God,
for sin by their free will to be wrought, was pur
posed by God before the world. " 2
"God's full foreknowledge of the course of
human history makes necessary his full deter
mination of all that which he foresees." 3
And yet God is not the author of human sin,
"neither indeed is it sensible to say that God
determined what the will of others would do."
God does not command or work evil ; he is
"the Supreme Governor of the whole world,
and of all persons and actions therein, how sin
ful soever, using and ordering the covetousness
of Judas, the envy of the priests, and injustice of
Pilate, to the event of Christ's death, [actions]
in regard of them most wicked, but of God, most
gracious, and of us, most profitable. "
1 "Of Religious Communion," 3: 238.
2 "Defence," 1:279, 281.
s "Of Religious Communion," 3: 239.

THE CHAMPION OF CALVINISM 153
The first point to be observed here is that Rob
inson squarely faces the two facts of God's sov
ereignty and man's freedom. He asserts both
and proposes the dilemma that results.
"If any demand how this can be, that God,
who forbiddeth and hateth sin, yet should so
order persons and things by his providence, and
so from eternity purpose to order them, as that
the same cannot be, I answer, by free acknowl
edgment that the manner of God's working
herein is to me and to all men inconceivable." 1
And yet Robinson realized that some effort
must be made by the reason to answer the ques
tion. This effort he made in advancing two
subtle "distinctions" to clear up the matter.
The first is a difference between necessity and
compulsion. Every human action is very com
plex; there are many forces at work whenever
a choice is made. Therefore the choice may be
viewed from many sides. If a man were struck
so forcibly by a blow from outside that he abso
lutely could not avoid falling, it would be a case
of compulsion. God never compels a soul in
this way. But when we take such an act as the
meeting of Ahab and Elijah (I Kings 21:18), we
see how an action may be viewed in many ways.
'"Defence," 1:274. 275.

154 JOHN ROBINSON
To Ahab this was a chance meeting; to Elijah
it was the obedience of a divine command; it
was an illustration of necessity but not of com
pulsion. Since God's will was carried out in it,
it was a necessary action.1 The second subtle
distinction lies in the fact that God may be " the
author of the action or fact, but not of the
sin of the fact." This becomes clearer when we
note Robinson's conception of sin, which is not
"a thought, word, or deed contrary to the will
of God," (as his antagonists held), but sin
consists "in the contrariety which the same deed
or motion hath in it to the law of God." Sin
is "only the absence and want of that conform
ity and agreeableness, which ought to be in
the thought, word or work of the reasonable
creature to the law of God." Every action,
therefore, is to be regarded intrinsically as an
action, and then in regard to its moral quality.
If a murder were committed, the deed must be
considered both as a specific act and then as to
its moral content; as, for example, it is clear that
the execution of a condemned criminal by the
magistrate and the killing of Amasa by Joab
is, in the former case, a good action, and in the
second case a bad action. So, God is the author
1 "Defence," 1:291.

THE CHAMPION OF CALVINISM 155
of the intrinsic action, but not of the moral qual
ity, or the perversion of the right use of the action
in which the sin consists.
We have brought forward this specific instance
of Robinson's argument, simply that the general
tenor of a considerable body of his reasoning
may be seen. His weakest point is always in his
attempt to justify himself in places where he rec
ognizes the difficulties and contradictions of his
position. He is a thoroughgoing Calvinist, and
the fact that he could remain even partially sat
isfied with his "subtle distinctions" is striking.
To Robinson's opponents this was "merely a
fabulous riddle" and "marvellous sophistica
tion." But he was humble and earnest in his
effort to handle "those high mysteries" of the
divine sovereignty and human freedom. His
arguments were not new, neither were they con
vincing, and the real man is far less revealed in
them than in his strong assertion of both terms
of the controversy, standing with a humble heart
acknowledging that the mystery was inexplicable.
On only one other point is it necessary to dwell
at any length. This is the matter of the Atone
ment. Man is in a state of sin which is the result
of the transgression of Adam. This act came
about by Adam's free choice, God having decreed,

156 JOHN ROBINSON
not the choice itself, but the conditions under
which the choice was made. The sin followed,
but not "as an effect upon a cause working it —
God forbid! — but as a consequent upon an ante
cedent; or as an event necessarily following upon
a most holy, wise, and powerful providence, so
ordering and disposing, that the same should
so come to pass infallibly, though performed by
Adam's free, and freely-working will."1 All
Adam's posterity are born with a sinful dis
position for which they are responsible, and to
change which a gift of supernatural grace is
necessary. Atonement for this sin is made
possible by the grace of God in the work of
Christ. But the redemption is not universal.
Christ's death is sufficient for all, since it was
the death of him who was God; but it has not
been made efficient for all. Christ died "effect
ually" for "them only that are saved." Christ
did not die for all; but all for whom Christ died
shall be saved.2
This is carrying the doctrine of election and a
limited atonement to the extreme. Robinson
does not hesitate to do this. He proposes no
theory of the atonement; but he plainly limits
it to the elect.
'"Defence," 1: 274. 2 Ibid., 1: 333.

THE CHAMPION OF CALVINISM 157
We will not take up more points in this survey
of Robinson's theological writing. The cham
pion of Calvinism is radical and thoroughgoing,
and there is no sign of mellowing in the austerity
of his convictions during these ten years from
1614 to 1624. The work which he did as a writer
for the cause was supplemented by what he did in
public debate. This brings up the matter of the
so-called "Dispute with Episcopius." The his
torical situation was briefly as follows:
The feature that distinguishes the German from
the Dutch churches is the fact that the former
are Lutheran and the latter Calvinistic. The
Calvinistic theology, therefore, obtained suprem
acy in the Dutch church and was taught in the
schools. The first radical modification of strict
Calvinistic theology by an official teacher was by
James Arminius, professor of theology at Ley
den, who died in October, 1609. Between him
self and his colleague Gomarus the controversy
concerning predestination was waged bitterly so
long as Arminius lived. The closing months of
this personal contention marked the settlement
of John Robinson and his company in Leyden.1
After an interim of two years, Arminius was
1 Griffis, "The Pilgrims in Their Three Homes, " p. 140, says that Ar
minius "died October 19, 1609, while the Pilgrims were in Amsterdam."
The Scrooby brethren were settled in Leyden before that date.

158 JOHN ROBINSON
succeeded in the chair of theology in Leyden by
Episcopius, who held that chair from 1611 until
after the decree of the Synod of Dort banished
him in 1618. During this time controversy in
the University grew more intense. Robinson's
part in it is thus reported by Bradford :
"In these times allso were ye great troubls
raised by ye Arminians, who, as they greatly mol-
lested ye whole state, so this citie in particuler,
in which was ye cheef e universitie ; so as ther were
dayly & hote disputs in ye schooles ther aboute;
and as ye studients & other lerned were devided in
their oppinions hearin, so were ye 2. proffessors or
devinitie readers them selves ; the one daly teaching
for it, ye other against it. Which grew to that pass,
that few of the discipls of ye one would hear ye
other teach. But Mr . Robinson, though he taught
thrise a weeke him selfe, & write sundrie books,
besids his manyfould pains otherwise, yet he went
constantly to hear ther readings, and heard ye
one as well as ye other; by which means he was
so well grounded in ye controversie, and saw ye
force of all their arguments, and knew ye shifts
of ye adversarie, and being him selfe very able,
none was fitter to buckle with them then him selfe,
as appered by sundrie disputs; so as he begane
to be terrible to ye Arminians; which made Episco
pius (ye Arminian professor) to put forth his best
stringth, and set forth sundrie Theses, which by
publick dispute he would defend against all men.

THE CHAMPION OF CALVINISM 159
Now Poliander ye other proffessor, and ye cheefe
preachers of ye citie, desired Mr. Robinson to dis
pute against him; but he was loath, being a
stranger; yet the other did importune him, and
tould him yt such was ye abilitie and nimblnes
of ye adversarie, that ye truth would suffer if he
did not help them. So as he condescended, &
prepared him selfe against the time; and when ye
day came, the Lord did so help him to defend ye
truth & foyle this adversarie, as he put him to an
apparent nonplus, in this great & publike audience.
And ye like he did a 2. or 3. time, upon such like
occasions. The which as it caused many to praise
God yt the trueth had so famous victory, so it pro
cured him much honour & respecte from those
lerned men & others which loved ye trueth.' ' 1
There is no doubt about the common acceptance
of this report concerning the large significance of
John Robinson's debate with his Arminian antag
onist. Governor Winslow inserts the same gen
eral statement into his "Hypocrisie Unmasked."
The details are not all clear; but we have no
reason for distrusting Bradford's statement.
Rev. Alexander Gordon, who contributes the
article on Robinson to "The Dictionary of Na
tional Biography, " 2 thinks that there may be
some basis in fact behind these reports, but main-
1 "Of Plimoth Plantation," pp. 27, 28.
2 Vol. xlix, pp. 18 ff.

160 JOHN ROBINSON
tains that it is not probable either that the dispute
was held in the University or that it was under
taken at the request of Polyander and the city
ministers. In proof he cites the silence of the
records of the university on the matter, and the
fact that, at this time, the dominant party in
Leyden was the Arminian.
We are not warranted in the least, even if we
accept Bradford very literally, in imagining that
this disputation was an academic function of suf
ficient moment to cause it to be recorded in the
list of events in the university. The silence of
the records has no special bearing in the case. We
know that Robinson was an attendant at lectures
in the university, and, at a time of intense excite
ment over a question of theology and politics,
such as the Arminian question then was, it is
wholly within the bounds of reason to suppose
that Robinson went to the public discussions which
would be held in the university as a champion of
the Calvinistic side.
There is another point which has not been con
sidered fully in regard to its bearing upon the
probable share of Robinson in the discussion of
the burning question in the university. Why did
Robinson write and publish the "Defence of the
Doctrine propounded by the Synod at Dort"?

THE CHAMPION OF CALVINISM 161
There was no special demand for the composition
or publication of such a work from his own con
gregation. Robinson's writing in defence of the
Separation as a whole, and his treatment of devel
oping phases of practice in his own church were
made necessary by the specific needs of his own
congregation. Such a work as the "Defence,"
however, was not carried through merely in the
interests of his own people. Robinson was abun
dantly able to instruct them in doctrine by his
sermons and lectures, which undoubtedly were
composed very largely of dogmatic material. The
"Defence" presupposes a far wider circle of read
ers than Separatists in Leyden and Amsterdam. It
is most reasonable to believe that he was encour
aged in its preparation and publication by the
leaders of the contest with?Arminian teachings,
who, Bradford says, invited YRobinson to enter
the lists of oral debate.
Hence, Robinsombore'a part, dignified and con
spicuous, in the oral 'and written defence of Cal
vinistic doctrine} m \ Leyden. It was as earnest
as his defence of^the Separation, although it exhib
its far less flexibility than we findjin his treatment
of the theory and practice of a free church.

VIII
THE GREAT CONTROVERSY CONCERN
ING FELLOWSHIP

CHAPTER VIII
THE GREAT CONTROVERSY CONCERNING FELLOWSHIP
From a survey of the stern, inflexible, dogmatic
teaching of Robinson it is a pleasure to turn to a
study of the gracious movement of his theory and
practice in relation to Christian fellowship. The
story is interesting from the outset. It covers
the whole period of his Leyden pastorate. For
the sake of unity it will be brought together entire
in this chapter. It is in this great controversy
that Robinson made a unique contribution to the
history of the Congregational churches.
Let us review for a moment the position which
he had taken as the result of personal pressure
brought to bear upon him in Amsterdam. He
went to the limits of complete separation from
the members of the Church of England. He did
not deny the reality of their faith nor the gen
uineness of certain moral and spiritual qualities
in them. But he believed that the ecclesiastical
system of the English Christians as established by
law was utterly false and sinful, and that true faith
165

166 JOHN ROBINSON
and excellent spiritual character could not pos
sibly exist in the Anglican system in such a way
that he could enjoy communion with its members.
It appeared to him like the case of the meats offered
in sacrifices in heathen temples. The early Chris
tians were forbidden to eat them, not because the
whole subject of meat for food was involved, but
because in this case the meat had been so essen
tially connected with something evil that it was
thereby contaminated and its use forbidden.
Therefore, a complete separation from the mem
bers of the Church of England was necessary,
because its corruption was essential. Thus he
carried the Separation to its bitter end. He had
reached this position in Amsterdam and had defined
it in 1610. It was uncharitable ground; but there
can be no question concerning Robinson's clear
conception of all that it involved, and no doubt
about his sincerity in maintaining the rigid Sepa
ration. The first sign of a change in Robinson's position
appears from letters which passed between him
self and Rev. William Ames, enough of which
have been preserved to enable us to see the posi
tions taken by the correspondents.
William Ames was a man of Robinson's own
age; had been, as a pupil in Cambridge, very deeply

THE GREAT CONTROVERSY 167
influenced by William Perkins; had refused to
wear the surplice and, therefore, had suffered sus
pension; and had come to be an able representa
tive of the conforming Puritans. He was a more
learned and a much stronger antagonist than Ber
nard. He was often in Holland, and is said to
have been sent to Leyden at the expense of certain
English merchants for the purpose of engaging in
controversy with Robinson. He was an ardent
champion of Calvinism, and watched the proceed
ings of the Synod of Dort in the interests of this
doctrine. There seems to be little doubt that Ames was
engaged in personal controversy with Robinson
in Leyden in reference to the Separation. And
this was probably the occasion of the exchange
of letters, to which we will now turn.
They are preserved in a small volume which
contains a virulent attack upon the Ancient Lon
don Church, published in 1612, under the title
" The Prophane Schisme of the Brownists or Sep
aratists." Christopher Lawne and three others
are named as the authors, but Robinson. asserts
that the book is the work of others than these. In
this volume, William Ames allowed certain letters
that had been exchanged between himself and
Robinson to be published without the latter 's

168 JOHN ROBINSON
consent or least suspicion that they were to be
made public in this way.
Robinson's first letter is lost. Ames replied to
it, evidently from the Hague, in 1611. He urged
Robinson to consider if communion were not pos
sible entirely outside a church order. The fact
that men have communion with Christ is the
ground of their communion with one another.
Prayer is indulged in before a covenant is entered;
but, even Robinson would hold, the church exists
by virtue of its covenant; therefore communion
in prayer is possible out of any church organiza
tion. To this letter Robinson made answer from Ley
den, maintaining stiffly that religious communion
does not rest upon the discovery of inward fellow
ship with Christ, but that it is conditioned upon
the orderly establishment of church relations.
Therefore, it is unlawful for Separatists to hear
Anglican ministers preach; or to join with them in
prayer; or even to engage in private prayer with
members of the Church of England.
In these letters to Ames, then, we find Robinson
holding the same position which he maintained
against Bernard in his "Justification of Separa
tion." But in 1614 there appeared by far the most

THE GREAT CONTROVERSY 169
significant of all Robinson's books, "Of Relig
ious Communion, Private and Public." The title
itself hints at some change of view. His words
in the preface and at the very beginning of the
treatise show us what this change is. Robinson
has realized the force of the difference between
"public" and "private" communion. He says
that he never intended to call in question the
faithfulness and goodness of the many in the
parishes of England who were thereby worthy of
communion with Christian brethren. But the
point which he feared was that the true order of
the church would be violated if there should be
any communion between those who were gath
ered in the one true church order (that is, the
church of the Separatists) and the Church of Eng
land. The change in Robinson's opinion was due
to the discovery of
"a distinction of religious actions into personal
and church actions, which, if either Mr. A[mes]
had observed unto me, or I myself then conceived
of, would have cleared the question to my con
science, and with which I did wholly satisfy my
self in this matter, when God gave me once to
observe it. My judgment therein and the reasons-
of it I have set down in the first part of the book,
[Of Religious Communion] unto which I bind no

170 JOHN ROBINSON
man further to assent than he sees ground from
the Scriptures."1
The passage of Scripture from which more light
broke to Robinson on this fundamental matter of
his religious practice was Col. 2:5,
"For though I be absent in the flesh, yet am I
with you in the spirit, joying and beholding your
order, and the steadfastness of your faith."
It is an interesting commentary upon Robin
son's value of the Scripture even in its most de
tailed statements, and the sympathetic manner in
which he interpreted it, that this passage, often
read so carelessly as one of the less important
utterances of a letter of Paul, should decide Rob
inson's opinions so radically. He discovers here
that Paul reduces the reasons of his rejoicing to
two, the "faith" and the " order" of the members
of the church in Colossae. Of these, faith is the
more important, in that it makes men capable
of the church order in which they stand united.
From these two fountain heads flow two sorts of
religious actions, which may be termed " personal "
and " church" actions. Personal actions are those
which are prompted and sanctioned by personal
faith. They are private prayer, thanksgiving,
singing of psalms, profession of faith, confession
1 "Of Religious Communion," 3: 102.

THE GREAT CONTROVERSY 171
of sins, reading and explaining the Scriptures,
or hearing this done in a family or elsewhere,
without the use of any church or ministry for this
purpose being deemed necessary. On the other
hand, church actions consist in the reception or
excommunication of members, electing and depos
ing of officers, and all employment of a public
ministry or communion under the sanction of the
church order.
For the first set of actions personal faith only
is necessary on the part of those who perform
them. Personal faith is also necessary for the
right performance of the second set of actions,
but, in addition to faith, there must also be a true
church order, in and by which these functions are
to be realized.
The practical result of this distinction in Scrip
ture is a new proposition, namely,
"that we who profess a Separation from the
English national, provincial, diocesan and paro
chial church and churches, in the whole formal
state and order thereof, may, notwithstanding,
lawfully communicate in private prayer, and other
the like holy exercises (not performed in their
church communion, nor by their church power
and ministry) with the godly amongst them,
though remaining of infirmity members of the
same church or churches, except some other ex-

172 JOHN ROBINSON
i
traordinary bar come in the way between them
and us."1
This new proposition Robinson defends at
length, admitting its inconsistency with what he
had as strenuously maintained in his former writ
ings. But he claims that the new position is
really only a return to that which he had occupied
at the time of his original decision for the Sepa
ration, and that the same difference between faith
and order had really been made also by Barrow,
Johnson and Ainsworth.
The argument, however, we will not follow in
detail. There are two points of value for us as
we seek to set forth Robinson's development and
character. The first is the manner in which he
reached the new position. Such an exegetical
conclusion from a rather insignificant passage in
the New Testament seems to us quite unwarrant
able. No canons of historical-critical interpre
tation could give us such a result. But to John
Robinson the method was perfectly valid and the
conclusion perfectly clear. To us it seems that
the elaborate result reached had been rather
read into the passage by Robinson's own kindly
mind craving Scriptural sanction for a catholic
view of Christian fellowship. And such may be
1 "Of Religious Communion," 3: 105.

THE GREAT CONTROVERSY 173
the case. If it is, the process was unconscious.
John Robinson's heart may have craved what he
found; he may have hit upon the wealth of mean
ing which he discovered in Paul's words very
largely because of that craving. But to him it
was a true breaking forth of light from the Word
of God for the guidance of his way. He sought
to bind no one to his opinion further than the war
rant of the Word seemed to be sufficient. There
is no better index to the whole spirit of Robinson 's
life than we find in this change of opinion con
cerning communion and the reasons which he him
self gives for it. We shall need to recall it when
we consider later the use of the phrase "more
light," which is so often and so justly used to
describe his character.
The effect of this change in position is very
marked in the controversies of the time. The
followers of Henry Ainsworth in Amsterdam still
maintained the rigid Separation. Against them
Rev. John Paget, who, we recollect, was the pastor
of the Scotch Presbyterian church there, issued
"An Arrow against the Separation of the Brown
ists" in 1618. The publication of Paget 's book
was occasioned by the refusal of Ainsworth 's peo
ple to have fellowship with Paget 's church mem
bers. Robinson's position taken in "Of Religious

174 JOHN ROBINSON
Communion" was naturally an argument of prime
value to Paget. He writes against Ainsworth,
"You send me unto such a book of Mr. Robin
son as himself doth begin to revoke publicly as
being unsound in divers things [i. e. the "Justifi
cation of Separation," 1610] whereas I refer you
unto a later book of his [i. e. " Of Religious
Communion"], made with riper deliberation and
in no part that I hear of publicly revoked.
His . . . Justification of Separation is sick of
King Jehoram's incurable disease . . . ; unto
this rotten book you refer me, and yet blame
me that refer you unto that which is more
sound." 1
The same plan of argument is pursued through
his book by Paget. And it must have been a dif
ficult point for Ainsworth to meet. His church
was deeply stirred over ihe question, and the peo
ple publicly and earnestly urged Ainsworth to
defend his position for the rigid Separation against
Robinson.2 Paget also gives us a glimpse of
the practice of Robinson's church as early as
1618. He says,
"Mr. Robinson"and his people do now (as divers
of themselves confess) receive the members of
the Church of England unto their congregation,
and this without any renunciation of the Church
1 Paget, " An Arrow," p. 59.
2 Ibid., p. 6.

THE GREAT CONTROVERSY 175
of England, without any repentance for their
idolatries, committed in the Church of England.
How can you [Ainsworth] hold them to be a
true church, and communion with them lawful,
seeing that, by your reasoning, they are tied in the
cords of their sin as well as we?"1
Paget undoubtedly means nothing more than
what Robinson would call "private communion"
by his statement, "receive the members of the
Church .of England into their congregation." For
Robinson's opinion concerning the matter of dis
tinctively church fellowship had not changed in
1615, when he wrote in reply to William Ames,
"A Manumission to a Manuduction, or Answer to
a Letter inferring Publique Communion in the
Parrish Assemblies upon Private with Godly Per
sons there."2 (1615.) Ames sought earnestly
to take advantage of the partial victory which
he had won in Robinson's book, "Of Religious
Communion," and to overcome Robinson's argu
ments for the necessity of separation in all relig
ious actions involving the use of the Anglican
church and ministry. The argument in the " Manu
mission" is perfectly clear. Robinson held the
positions maintained in 1614 in "Of Religious
1 Paget, ' 'An Arrow, "p. 127.
2 Reprinted in "Mass. Hist. Soe. Coll.," 1 : 165-194. Copy in Congre
gational Library, Boston, Mass.

176 JOHN ROBINSON
Communion." Ames published a second " Manu-
duction" to Robinson in 1615. The influence of
this we are not able to determine.
The next available source from which light is
to be had on Robinson's teachings and practice
regarding fellowship consists of two letters dated
in the year 1624, written by him, one to a church
in London and another to the church in Amster
dam. The former is the more important. Both
were printed as an appendix to Robinson's book,
"The Lawfulness of Hearing,"1 which will be
taken up next.
A Separatist church in London had found itself
confronted with a practical problem. It was
this: A young woman, a member of the church,
had been discovered attending the services of the
Church of England, especially for the purpose of
hearing the Scriptures read and explained. For
this the church had disciplined her. She had
promised, however, to discontinue the practice
for which she was censured, and, on the strength
of this promise, she had been restored to fellow
ship. The London church was not quite clear
concerning the decision that they had reached, and
sent to the Leyden church for their opinion on the
action that^had been taken. The decision of the
'Works, 3:379-393.

THE GREAT CONTROVERSY 177
Leyden church was read in public there and then
sent, by the unanimous consent of the church, to
the brethren in London. The reply was explicit
concerning the wisdom of retaining the young
woman in fellowship:
" We judge, that therein ye did well, yea, though
she had continued her practice upon occasion, and
without neglect of the church whereof she was a
member, how much more leaving it as she did."1
The reply from Leyden, therefore, went beyond
the mere terms of the inquiry. The church was
ready to approve the permanent retention in fel
lowship of a member who attended the services
of the Church of England, so long as that fact did
not interfere with the performance of the mem
ber's full duty to his own congregation. This
was a long step in advance of the teaching oi
Robinson in 1614 and 1615.
The London church also made an inquiry con
cerning the manner in which the members of
Henry Jacob's church were to be regarded.
This congregation was carrying out the Leyden
practice in relation to other churches, and it was
causing scandal. They were judged to be "idol
aters" in going to the public worship of the Angli
can church. The Leyden brethren's counsel was
'Works, 3:382.

178 JOHN ROBINSON
sought as to whether Jacob's church was a true
church or not, so long as it maintained this prac
tice. They answered that this was not idolatry
in any true sense of the term; Henry Jacob's
church was a true church. This judgment was
further attested by the fact that two persons, Mr.
and Mrs. Staresmore, were received into the Ley
den congregation from Henry Jacob's church on
the basis of their covenant made in that church,
and, later, were again received at Amsterdam.
Thus the character of Jacob's church in England
was satisfactory to the brethren in Leyden and
Amsterdam. At the same time it was known
that members of Jacob's church went to the serv
ices of the Church of England.
This is clear enough witness concerning Rob
inson's convictions in the year 1624. These
decisions of practical questions came just before
Robinson's death. They were simply the practi
cal application of a new principle which he was
working out, and which he put into a treatise
that we now have under the following title:
" A Treatise of the Lawfulnes of Hearing of the
Ministers in the Church of England; penned by
that learned and reverent Deuine, Mr. John Rob-
insz, late Pastor to the English Church of God in
Leyden. Printed^according to the copie that was

THE GREAT CONTROVERSY 179
found in his Studie after his decase, and now pub
lished for the common good."1
This manuscript was printed in 1634, nine years
after Robinson's death, by his friends and follow
ers. The publishers kept it back for nine years
out of respect to the spirit of its author. Their
preface tells us that they are aware that not all
the Leyden brethren agreed with the pastor's
position, and, therefore, knowing what his own
will would have been in the matter of preserving
harmony, they kept the manuscript. How truly
they had interpreted their pastor's spirit will ap
pear from the preface which he wrote for the treat
ise. There is hardly a whole book which he has
left us that interprets him more deeply than these
words, probably from the last year of his earthly
life: "As they that affect alienation from others
make their differences as great, and the adverse
opinion or practice as odious as they can, thereby
to further their desired victory over them, and to
harden themselves and their side against them,
so, on the contrary, they who desire peace and
accord both interpret things in the best part they
reasonably can, and seek how and where they
may find any lawful door of entry into accord and
agreement with others: of which latter number
'Works, 3: 339-393.

180 JOHN ROBINSON
I profess myself (by the grace of God) both a com
panion and a guide; especially in regard of my
Christian countrymen, to whom God hath tied
me in so many inviolable bonds; accounting it a
cross that I am, in any particular, compelled to
dissent from them, but a benefit and matter of
rejoicing when I can in anything with good con
science unite with them in matter, if not in man
ner, or, where it may be, in both. And this affec
tion, the Lord and my conscience are my witnesses,
I have always nourished in my breast, even when
I seemed furthest drawn from them: and so all-
that have taken knowledge of my course can tes
tify with me, and how I have still opposed in others.
and repressed in mine own people, to [the extent
of] my power, all sour zeal against, and peremp
tory rejection of such [persons or practices] as
whose holy graces challenge better use and respect
from all Christians. And in testimony of my
affection this way, and for the freeing of mine own
conscience, I have penned this discourse, tending
to prove the hearing of the Word of God preached
by the ministers of the Church of England, able
to open and apply the doctrines of faith by that
church professed, both lawful, and, in cases, nec
essary for all of all sects or sorts of Christians,
having opportunity and occasion of so doing,
though sequestering themselves from all commun
ion with the hierarchical order there established.
"Three sorts of opposites I make account to
meet withal. The first, of them who truly desire
and carefully endeavor to have their whole course

THE GREAT CONTROVERSY 181
both in religion and otherwise framed by the holy
and right seal of God's Word, either for their con
firmation in the truth, or reformation wherein
through human frailty they step aside. And
unto them especially, I direct this my discourse,
begging at His hands, who is the Father of lights,
and from whom cometh down every good and per
fect gift, for them as for myself, that, as he hath
given us to set our faces toward heaven, and to
seek him with the whole heart, so he would not
suffer us to wander from his commandments to
the right hand or to the left.
"A second sort is of them whose tender and
scrupulous conscience makes them fearful and
jealous of everything that hath in it the least
appearance or show of evil, lest, coming too near
it, they be defiled by it one way or other. This
their godly zeal and tenderness of heart is to be
loved of all men, and cherished by all good means.
Only such are to be entreated for their own good
to take knowledge of a distinction most useful
for their direction in things lawful in their kind,
and good in their right use: of which some are
only naturally good in their kind, but not simply
commanded of God, as to get and keep the riches
and credit of the world, to enjoy outward peace,
or other bodily comfort. Others are morally
good in their kind and commanded of God, as to
hear the Word of God, obey the magistrate, and
the like. Now in things of the former sort, it is
very requisite, considering both their nature and
ours, that we keep a jealous eye and strait hand

182 JOHN ROBINSON
over ourselves and our ways. . . . But now for
the practice and performance of duties simply
moral and commanded in their kind, as is the
hearing of God's Word, especially by God's peo
ple, we ought to strain to the utmost, and to go
as near the wind as may be. . . .
"A third sort of opposites I make account to
meet with, more untractable than the former,
and more vehemently bent against the thing pro
pounded by me, out of prejudice and passion,
than the other by scruple of conscience or show
of reason. To them I can hardly say anything,
it not being their manner to read or willingly to
hear that which crosseth their prejudices. Yet
something I must say touching them, out of the
woeful experience of many years taken of them,
though not much, I thank the Lord, amongst them
unto whom I have ministered. Some of these I
have found carried with so excessive admiration
of some former guides in their course, as they think
it half heresy to call into question any of their
determinations, or practices. We must hot think
that only the Pharisees of old and Papists of later
times are superstitiously addicted to the traditions
of the elders and authority of the church. In all
sects there are divers, especially of the weaker
sort, who, being the less real in their conceptions
are the more personal, that [sic] rather choose to
follow the troad [i. e. trodden path] of blind tra
dition than the right way of God's Word by others
to be shown them afterwards."1
1 "Lawfulness of Hearing," 3: 353-356.

THE GREAT CONTROVERSY 183
We have made this long quotation from the
preface to Robinson's defense of the Leyden prac
tice not only because it epitomizes so much of his
spirit and method in controversy, but also because
of its intrinsic nobility of conception. In all the
bitter contention, dreary argument, fierce invec
tive and unfair device of the controversial litera
ture that we have examined in the history of the
Separation up to the year 1624, there is no sweeter,
kindlier, braver utterance than this. It stands
for "sweetness and light" in a wonderful degree.
Especially important is this excerpt for comparison
with the so-called "Farewell Address," which we
shall consider later.
The argument of the treatise we will not follow
in detail. The quotation given hints at the gen
eral nature of the discussion. The point worth
noting is the relation of the argument to Robin
son 's emphasis in former writings upon the doc
trine of the "connivance at sin" which impelled
him to the rigid Separation. The general prin
ciple as enunciated by his opponents was,
" He that in anything partakes with that church
in which sins known are suffered unreformed,
partakes in all the sins of that church." 1
This is a statement of the principle, however,
1 "Lawfulness of Hearing," 3: 359.

184 JOHN ROBINSON
which he himself might have made at the time of
his controversy with Bernard (1610), and which
he did make practically. But now his interpre
tation has changed. He says,
" I partake not in the sins of any, how great or
manifest soever the sins be, or how near unto me
soever the persons be except the same sins either
be committed or remain unreformed by my fault.
Otherwise, Christ our Lord had been enwrapped
in the guilt of a world of sins in the Jewish Church,
with which church he communicated in God's
ordinances, living and dying a member thereof." J
Hence Robinson holds it to be
" a most vain imagination that everyone that par
takes with a church in things lawful joins with it
in upholding the things unlawful found in it."2
This is a most significant change. Here Ber
nard and Ames both might have taken their posi
tion in seeking to rebut the favorite Separatist
argument. Robinson has wrested the strongest
element out of the old argument in thus taking
refuge behind this idea of personal responsibility.
When we test Robinson's practice by his the
ory we have several sources from which we get
light upon it. Perhaps the chief of these is Win-
slow 's incident regarding David Calderwood of
1 ''Lawfulness of Hearing," 3: 359.
2 Ibid., 390.

THE GREAT CONTROVERSY 185
Scotland, which is in his " Hypocrisie Unmasked, "
p. 96. 1 David Calderwood was the author of a
book entitled " Perth Assembly," which was
printed by William Brewster at his fugitive shop
for setting type in Leyden, in 1619. The book
aroused the fiercest rage of King James I and all
the officers of the church, who were determined
to force episcopacy upon Scotland, and Calderwood
escaped to Holland from Scotland in August,
1619. 2 Calderwood was a personal friend of Rob
inson and was accustomed to hear Robinson
preach. When the church came to the celebra
tion of the sacrament of the Lord's Supper, Cal
derwood asked permission to remain to witness
it, and Robinson answered him, —
" Reverend Sir, you may not onely stay to behold
us, but partake with us, if you please, for wee
acknowledge the Churches of Scotland to be the
Churches of Christ."
Calderwood declined the courtesy. But the mean
ing of Robinson's invitation is certainly clear
enough. He practiced as he taught while pastor
of the Leyden Church.
1 Quoted in Dexter, "Congregationalism as Seen," p. 396.
2 Arber, "Story of the Pilgrim Fathers," p. 239 ff.

IX
CHURCH POLITY IN LEYDEN AND
AMSTERDAM

CHAPTER IX
CHURCH POLITY IN LEYDEN AND AMSTERDAM
From this study of Robinson's most significant
contribution to the history of the Separation,
which from its very nature is peculiarly of per
manent interest and present value, we turn to a
study of his position in the polity of the Separatist
churches. The aristocratic tendencies in Barrow's
teaching and the democratic elements in Browne's
have been outlined. The working out of the two
ideals in the life of an organized church was con
fined chiefly to Amsterdam. Robinson was not
so directly concerned in the struggle as were John
son and Ainsworth. He was drawn into it, how
ever, and bore a large part not only in the defini
tion of the theory but also in the determination
of the practice of the Congregational polity. The
struggle assumes an added significance when it is
remembered that these are the teachings of the
man most influential in molding the political ideals
of ^ the Pilgrim Fathers.
The removal of the Scrooby church from Amster
dam to Leyden was occasioned very largely by
189

190 JOHN ROBINSON
the fact that "ye flames of contention" were
perceived by Robinson as about to break out in
the Ancient Church. This contention was partly
concerning the place and authority of the elder
ship in the government of the church. It was
simply the outward manifestation of a general
haziness which prevailed in the teaching of the
earlier Separatists. This teaching it is not easy
to classify. The terms of modern political science
could not have been used then; words which we
have learned to ennoble were then considered to
be terms of indignity. Many a name given in
contempt becomes in the course of time the pride
and boast of a party. Hence, we must not be
surprised to find Robinson seeking to shun the
reproach of a name the glory of which we are glad
to assume. Underneath the different terms we
must search for the real facts of the teaching of
these men, and not suffer ourselves to wonder too
much at frequent inconsistency and obscurity.
In the case of Francis Johnson, pastor of the
Ancient Church in Amsterdam, there is clear enough
evidence of a decided bent toward the aristocratic
emphasis in Barrow. His own experiences with
his church probably increased the tendency, for
he would not care to trust too much to the popular
judgment as to the Christian character of his

CHURCH POLITY 191
own family relations. He went on until he be
came, in the words of Robinson, "immoderately
jealous for the officers' dignity." The whole
emphasis of the pastor was, therefore, laid in
creasingly upon the power of the elders.
Against this tendency Henry Ainsworth, the
teacher, set himself, supported by a minority of
the congregation. But in doing this he did not
become the advocate of the full power of the peo
ple in self-government. That would have been
democracy, and to advocate democracy was to
become the champion of all that is confusing and
disruptive in orderly government, according to
the generally accepted ideas even of the Separa
tists themselves.
When Robinson issued his "Justification of
Separation" in 1610, his teaching in reference to
the eldership was displeasing to Johnson. He
took Robinson's book into the meeting place and
"there before the congregation made a solemne
testification against the manifold errors contained
in it, which he disclaimed, and not only so, but
wrote letters to M[r.] Robinson to rebuke him for
the same."1
It was probably in reply to these letters, no
traces of which are at present known, or in the
1 Lawne, "Prophane Schisme," p. 76.

192 JOHN ROBINSON
correspondence called out by the difference in
practice, that Robinson warned Johnson against
overthrowing the constitution of the church by
his practice. This letter was read publicly in a
meeting of the Ancient Church, and
" Master Johnson hath thereupon said, let master
Robinson then looke to the constitution of his
church." 1
Johnson was very outspoken in his condemnation
of the practice of Robinson in Leyden, calling it
"the confusion of Korah and his companie."
The pastors were thus set in direct opposition;
and then the deacons joined in the conflict. Dea
con Daniel Studley of Amsterdam wrote a letter
to Deacon Samuel Fuller of Leyden, in which he
described the whole company of the brethren at
Leyden as
"ignorant idiots, noddy Nabalites, dogged
Doegs, fairfaced Pharisees, shameless Shemeites,
malicious Machiauellians. " 2
Lawne makes fun of this " Alphabeticall slan
derer, " and it is not difficult to imagine that Stud-
ley's tirade caused Pastor Robinson and Deacon
Fuller a hearty laugh together.
An open rupture came in Amsterdam between
1 Lawne, "Prophane Schisme," p. 72.
2 Ibid., p. 77.

CHURCH . POLITY 193
the followers of Francis Johnson, called the " Fran
ciscans," and the followers of Ainsworth, the
teacher of the church, called the "Ainsworth-
ians." The sympathies of the Leyden men were,
of course, with the latter. This was evident
enough from the manner in which the arguments
of Robinson in his "Justification of Separation"
had provoked Johnson and buttressed the posi
tions of Ainsworth. When Ainsworth proposed,
therefore, that the counsel of Robinson and his
church be sought for settling the quarrel, John
son's party refused to accept their advice. Then
about thirty members of the Ancient Church,
supporters of Ainsworth, wrote to the Leyden
church, rehearsed the trouble, and asked for help
toward a settlement. At the same time they in
formed the brethren in Leyden that the elders
(who were, practically, according to Johnson's
teaching, the church) would not approve the en
trance of Robinson's members into the affair, but
would permit it, if the Leyden brethren would
come in either on their own initiative or at the
request of the Ainsworthians. a
To this rather humiliating request Robinson
made a dignified reply. This was not directed
to the thirty who had sent his people the request,
1 Works, 3: 470.

194 JOHN ROBINSON
but to the entire officers and membership of the
Ancient Church. With skill, wisdom and kind
ness Robinson laid the request of the thirty before
them, and then said that his people were not will
ing to come into the matter except they were
called for counsel by the whole church and unless
there were some hope of a successful issue of the
business. The Ancient Church refused to approve of any
interference for counsel on the part of the Leyden
brethren. Robinson wrote twice to the same
effect, and twice his advances were repulsed. He
gave up then any hope of helping in a dignified way.
In the meantime the majority deposed Ainsworth
from his office as teacher. Robinson had not
been standing for his dignity or privilege merely.
When matters came to this critical pass he was
ready to do anything in the interests of peace. A
delegation went up to Amsterdam. Robinson was
"chief of the messengers sent; whichShad that
good effect, as that they revoked the said deposi
tion [of Ainsworth from his office as teacher,] and
confessed their rashness and error, and lived to
gether in peace some good time}?after. " 1
The two factions were not quiet, however, in
spite of Robinson's most persistent and kindly
1 Gov. Bradford's "Dialogue" in "N. E. Memorial," Boston, 1855,
p. 330.

CHURCH POLITY 195
efforts to heal the breach. Ainsworth secured the
attendance of Robinson and his delegates in Am
sterdam a second time. Then Johnson proposed
that those members of his church who could not
agree to his methods in church government should
be dismissed to Leyden. The consent of Robin
son was secured. The end seemed to be in sight,
when suddenly the Ancient Church repudiated
the agreement, giving as their reason a fear that
the dismissed members would not leave Amster
dam, but would take their letters, and, later,
receive dismission from the Leyden church for
the purpose of forming a new congregation in
Amsterdam. Nothing less would satisfy the Fran
ciscans than the complete expulsion of the
Ainsworthians from Amsterdam. Thus ended all
Robinson's attempts to bring about a settlement.
The next proposition came from Johnson, who
outlined a scheme of "double practice," whereby
the Ancient Church was to keep together as an
organization, and yet each party was to manage
regarding the eldership according to its own con
victions. This was in November, 1610. Robinson
saw that such a condition of armed neutrality
never would succeed. He therefore proposed a
"middle way" of practice for them. Any matter
of church discipline was to be brought first

196 JOHN ROBINSON
before the elders as the proper governors of the
church; if it could be settled there, the decision
was final; if not, the case was to be brought "to
the church of elders and brethren to be judged
there."1 In proposing this plan Robinson saw clearly that
it meant a mutual surrender, and he foresaw
success only on condition that "it would please
.the Lord so far to enlarge your hearts on both
"sides, brethren, as that this middle way be held."
Robinson did not commend this method of con
ducting a church's affairs because he considered it
the best one under normal conditions, but because
he thought it might be a helpful compromise
measure under the conditions obtaining in Amster
dam. He stated expressly that this was not the
practice of the Leyden church in the conduct of
its business.
The proposition of the middle way did not suc
ceed. Ainsworth was deposed from his office,
and his followers were excommunicated from the
Ancient Church. Robinson was persistent in his
efforts for peace, and the dignity and resourceful
ness of the Leyden pastor are evident throughout
the entire transaction.
Lawne gives us a picture of one of the confer-
1 Works, 3:468. •_ , „i

CHURCH POLITY 197
ences in Amsterdam, which shows us some of the
difficulties of a practical sort with which Robin
son was obliged to contend in these negotiations :
"When some of master Ainsworth' s companie
wrote unto master Robinson, desiring him to come
and helpe the Lord against the mightie (against
master Johnson, whom they had accounted as the
strongest Giant of the Separation) master Robin
son at last came unto them to dispute with mas
ter Johnson about the change of his gouernment;
and being come and entred within the listes of that
disputation, he found master Ainsworth 's faction
so disorderly and clamorous, that he often desired
them to be still and silent, and reproued their
vnseemly and vnreasonable behaviour; but at
length when he saw the tumult encrease, (look
ing vpon them round about, as a man amazed
and agast, with fierce and outragious carriage)
he did then openly testifie among them, That he
had rather walke in peace with five godly persons,
than to live with fiue hundred or fiue thousand such
unquiet persons as these were." 1
Johnson then assured Robinson that the be
haviour of the Ainsworthians which seemed so
disorderly was really nothing when compared
with the manner in which they ordinarily carried
themselves. Robinson's self-command appears all
the more from such comparisons as these. There
1,1 Prophane Schisme," p. 84.

198 JOHN ROBINSON
is no wonder that the Ancient London Church
was disrupted. There was no master spirit in
control. It is not difficult to determine Robinson's the
ory of church government from his writings. A
brief statement of it has been made in the chapter
on his definition of the Separation in the contro
versy with Bernard. This is contemporary with
his effort to aid in the solution of the eldership
question in Amsterdam. In 1619 Robinson pub
lished his "Apologia" in Latin, which was issued
in 1625 in English under the title, "A Just and
Necessary Apology of Certain Christians, no less
contumeliously than commonly called Brownists
or Barrowists." x Its purpose was to make clear
the differences between the Reformed Churches
and the Leyden Church, and also to differentiate
the latter from other Separatist congregations.
The fourth chapter in this "Apology" is entitled
"Of the Ecclesiastical Presbytery." The general
position maintained, however, is not materially
changed from that of 1610. Robinson's system
of government is neither positively one thing
nor another. Its theory wavers. He believed
that no person should be chosen to the office of
an elder unless he were able to teach, exhort
1 Works, 3: p. 1-79.

CHURCH POLITY 199
and defend the faith in any public gathering as
well as in private meetings.1 The elders should be
chosen for a term of service lasting through life.
The chief point, however, was that the elders
ought not to exercise their power in private.
To meet apart from the congregation for delibera
tion concerning any matters properly within their
jurisdiction was right. But all their official action
must be public. The practice in the Reformed
churches, where the secret meetings of the elders
made it impossible for the people to know or
approve their actions, was, Robinson firmly held,
entirely wrong. Indeed, he went so far as to say
that, between the interpretation of the command,
"Tell the church, " which made the term " church"
equivalent to the Anglican bishops and their
officers, and that which made it equivalent to
"the senate of elders excluding the people," the
former meaning was far nearer the truth, for the
bishops and their officers did not exclude the
people from the consistories, but presented there
their judgment to the people.
It is interesting to see this kindlier view of epis
copacy and the consistory, against which Robinson
had once written so bitterly and which here he con
siders in a fairer light although without approval.
1 "Apology," 3: 28-41.

200 JOHN ROBINSON
The difference between the. two systems of gov
ernment comes out clearly only when we take a
specific instance by which to test it. This test
is the matter of church discipline. How was an
offender to be treated? Robinson's answer to
the question is clear. He held the censure of
offenders for any private or public scandal to be
the function of the elders, and granted that, in a
"well-ordered state of the church," the perform
ance of this function might be left to the elders
alone with safety; nevertheless it never could
be rightly performed without the knowledge and
consent of the people. An offender must not be
judged by the elders alone, "but by the church
with them, though governed by them.' '
According to this theory, which may seem to
be somewhat loosely defined, Robinson admin
istered the affairs of the Leyden church success
fully. He wrote to the Amsterdam brethren,
"We safely say, so far as we remember, that
there never came complaint of sin to the church
since we were officers, but we [i. e. the officers]
took knowledge of it before [it was brought openly
before the whole body of the church members],
either by mutual consent on both sides, or at least,
by the party accused; with whose Christian mod
esty and wisdom we think it well sorteth, that
being condemned by two or three brethern, he

CHURCH POLITY 201
should not trouble the church, or hazard a public
rebuke upon himself, without counselling with
them who are set over him, and who either are or
should be best able to advise him. " 1
There is a still more specific illustration of
the manner in which Robinson steered between
aristocracy and democracy in the government of
the congregation. When the church in London
sought the judgment of the churches in Leyden
and Amsterdam concerning the wisdom of retain
ing in fellowship the young woman who had at
tended Anglican worship, Robinson answered,
"he conceives it not orderly that the bodies of
churches should be sent to for counsel, but some
choice persons. Power and authority are in the
body for elections and censures, but counsel for
direction in all affairs, in some few; in which re
gard every particular church has appointed its
eldership for ordinary counsellors, to direct it and
the members thereof in all difficulties ; with whom
others are also to advise upon occasions, specially
ordinary." 2
From all these sources it is evident that Rob
inson took every possible course to avoid the idea
of democracy. As he asks Johnson, v " Where do
I in all this book, [The Justification of Separa-
1 Works, 3: 473, 474.
2 Ibid., 3: 382.

202 JOHN ROBINSON.
tion,] as is imputed to me, advance the people,
as others do the prelates, and make them idols?" 1
He held that the officers were the governors of
the congregation; the people, the governed; and
that power and government were two entirely
different things. The government was with the
officers; the power lay in the whole church, in
the people.
Robinson's writings are consistent in their
teaching, as his practical administration of the
Leyden church preserved the function of the church
officers and the power of the congregation for self-
government. He turned the tide that set to
ward oligarchy on the one hand, and he saved
the Separation from alliance with dangerous anar
chistic tendencies. He avoided the word democ
racy; with the content which the term then bore,
this was an act of wisdom. It was a true democ
racy for which he stood, however, and into the
possession of which he guided the Congregational
churches. 'Works, 3:481.

X
PROSPEROUS YEARS IN LEYDEN

CHAPTER X
PROSPEROUS YEARS IN LEYDEN
Returning now to the story of the church in
Leyden, we must pick up the thread of the nar
rative which was dropped at the close of Chapter
VI, at which point it seemed necessary to look
in detail at the matter of Robinson's theology,
his practice in regard to communion, and his rela
tion to the other Separatists in respect to the elder
ship. The complete organization of the church took
place after they were established in Leyden. As
we should naturally expect from Robinson's the
ories in regard to the matter, this was very sim
ple. He had only one elder associated with him.
This was William Brewster.1 He was chosen to
the office of ruling elder; but this, according to
Robinson's theory, implied that he was qualified
to be teaching elder as well. This position Brew
ster still held after the church had emigrated to
Plymouth, and in their services there used to call
upon such men as Winslow, Bradford and Morton
, 1 Bradford, ' ' Of Plimoth Plantation, " p. 17.
205

206 JOHN ROBINSON
to pray or give exhortations in the public ser
vices. 1
Two deacons were also chosen to office while
the church was in Leyden. These were Samuel
Fuller and John Carver, both of whom bore an
active part in the controversies of the time in Ley
den and rendered great service to the church in
Plymouth. So far as we can determine this was the full
number of the church's officers so long as they
remained in Leyden. There can be no question
as to the harmony of this governing body. Brew
ster, Fuller and Carver were in most perfect sym
pathy. They accepted the leadership of the pastor
in all his changing views concerning communion,
and held with him regarding the eldership. He
was the dominant force in their counsels, and the
concord and strength of the Leyden church grew
in no slight degree from the personal qualities
of the pastor and his three associates.
Robinson's work in the church was constant.
He preached twice on Sundays at services which
were probably quite like those held by the churches
in Amsterdam, which were thus described by
Richard Clifton:
1 Cotton, "An Account, etc.," in Mass. Hist. Soe. Coll. Series 1, Vol.
4, pp. 108, 118, 136.

PROSPEROUS YEARS IN LEYDEN 207
1. Prayer and giving of thanks by the pastor or
teacher.
2. The Scriptures are read, two or three chapters,
as time serves, with a brief explanation of
their meaning.
3. The pastor or teacher then takes some passage
of Scripture, and expounds and enforces it.
4. The sacraments are administered.
5. Some of the Psalms of David are sung by the
whole congregation, both before and after
the exercise of the Word.
6. Collection is then made, as each one is able,
for the support of the officers and the poor.1
That this was the general form observed in Ley
den we are quite sure. One of the records of the
church in Plymouth contains this answer made by
them to the objection current against them in
England that the sacraments were not adminis
tered frequently enough:
"The more is our grief that our pastor is kept
from us, by whom we might enjoy them, for we
used to have the Lord's supper every sabbath,
and baptism as often as there was occasion of chil
dren to baptize." 2
Robinson's relations to the Reformed, or Cal-
1 Clifton's ' 'Advertisement, " quoted in Robinson's Works, 3: 485.
2 Mass. Hist. Soe. Coll., 1795, Series 1, Vol. 4, p. 108.

208 JOHN ROBINSON
vinistic, churches of the city comes into view nat
urally at this point. In the year 1617 Paget wrote
his "An Arrow against the Separation of the
Brownists," in which he shows the inconsistency
between Robinson's arguments concerning the
use of churches in his controversy with Bernard
(1610) 1 and his practice in Leyden, where "hath
he for this long time tolerated Mr. Br[ewster] to
heare the word of God in such places:"
"And not onely this," Paget continues, "but
now of late this last moneth [June or July, 1617]
as is witnessed unto me, he, seeing (as it appears)
how rashly and unsoundly he hath written against
Mr. Bernard in this poynt, begins openly in the
middle of his congregation to plead for the lawful
use of these temples."2
This specific item of the use of churches erected
and decorated according to the religious princi
ples of earlier days was only one element in the
larger matter of the communion which Robinson
thought permissible held between the Separatists
and members of the Reformed churches. Cer
tainly in Leyden with Robinson's sanction there
was a great deal of liberty allowed members of the
church. And this involved a criticism which,
along with other more serious charges, Robinson
1 Works, 2: 468-472.
2 Paget, "An Arrow," pp. 28, 29.

PROSPEROUS YEARS IN LEYDEN 209
sought to meet by the publication of a Latin
"Apologia" in the year 1619. Here Robinson
set forth at considerable length the differences
between the two religious bodies.
It is interesting just here to notice one of the
causes which led Robinson to issue the " Apology. "
An anonymous Dutch poem had been exten
sively circulated in which the Reformed Church
in the Netherlands was compared to a tree, and all
the dissenting sects to certain beasts which were
zealously endeavoring to overthrow the tree. But
the stinging taunt of this poem bore hardest
against the Separatists or Brownists, as they
were called, who were likened "to a little worm,
gnawing at the root thereof, and not having less
will, but less power to hurt than the residue." 2
This anonymous poem was a shaft sent home to
Robinson's soul. It hurt worse than any more
dignified assault could have done.
The points of difference, as Robinson draws
them out, demand only a brief notice. In doc
trine, barring the one item of the authority of
the Apochryphal books of Scripture, the agree
ment between the Separatists and the Reformed
churches is absolute.
But the Separatists hold that no church, accord-
1 Works, 3:8.

210 JOHN ROBINSON
ing to the New Testament model, ought to con
sist of more members than can meet together in
one place; that only such children as are in cove
nant relations with the church by virtue of their
parents are subjects for infant baptism; that read
ing forms of prayer is not right; that the elders
ought all to be able to teach, also to serve for life,
and to administer their official duties in public
and not in " their private consistory." These are
the more important items in the discussion. But
the significance of the "Apology" lies in the gen
tler tones in which the controversy is carried on.
It is conciliatory and kindly. Nothing could bet
ter illustrate the deepening process in Robinson's
life than a contrast between the temper of his first
writings in 1609 and 1610, and this book from a
time ten years later. All the possible points of
agreement are mentioned here before the issue is
outlined. x The arguments of the Anglican oppo
nents are brought up, not " by way of accusa
tion," but only for the purpose of self-defense.
The language used to describe the condition of
the parishes has lost its venom. Even the bishops
are mentioned in a kindly way, and Robinson
brings forward the fact that, during the persecu
tions under Queen Mary, many of them gave their
1 Works, 3:64-70.

PROSPEROUS YEARS IN LEYDEN 211
lives in witness for the truth. The conforming
Puritans are not rebuked so harshly.
It lets us quickly into the comprehension of
this gracious spirit of the "Apology" to read a
part of the concluding paragraph:
"And here thou hast, Christian reader, the
whole order of our conversation in the work of
Christian religion, set down as briefly and plainly
as I could. If in any thing we err, advertise us
brotherly. . . . Err we may, alas! too easily: but
heretics, by the grace of God we will not be."
And at the very end Robinson wrote this peti
tion :
"This alone remaineth, that we turn our faces
and mouths unto thee, 0 most powerful Lord and
gracious Father, humbly imploring help from God
towards those who are by men left desolate. There
is with thee no respect of persons, neither are men
less regarders of thee if regarders of thee for the
world's disregarding them. They who truly fear
thee, and work righteousness, although constrained
to live by leave in a foreign land, exiled from
country, spoiled of goods, destitute of friends, few
in number, and mean in condition, are for all that
unto thee, 0 gracious God, nothing the less accept
able. Thou numberest all their wanderings, and
puttest their tears into thy bottles. Are they not
written in thy book? Towards thee, 0 Lord, are
our eyes; confirm our hearts, and bend thine ear,

212 JOHN ROBINSON
and suffer not our feet to slip, or our face to be
ashamed, 0 thou both just and merciful God. To
him through Christ be praise forever in the church
of saints; and to thee, loving and Christian reader,
grace, peace and eternal happiness. Amen."
The man who could write such words was one
to whom the conditions of his exile were a constant
pain. There is no mock humility or attempt to
plead the misery of his lot purely for the purposes
of argument here. One can see the sensitive
spirit of Robinson bearing the peculiar grief of his
humiliation, and trusting implicitly the infinite
resources of his God. This prayer comes out of
his heart. It shows a sensitive, gracious, proud
spirit, trusting his God and doing his work with
out dejection.
The prosperous years in Leyden were filled with
other minor conriwersies in which the clear think
ing and wise control of Robinson appear. One
of these gives us a glimpse of the inner life of the
church in its meetings. It is the controversy
with John Yates concerning the matter of "proph
esying out of office," or the whole matter of lay
preaching. In his "Justification of Separation"
(1610) Robinson took the ground that any per
son who had received the gift of public address
or prayer which could be used in the church for

PROSPEROUS YEARS IN LEYDEN 213
edification, exhortation or comfort, was bound to
exercise this gift in public meetings of the church.
Women were barred out, however, by the direct
command of the Scriptures that they must keep
silence in the churches.1 This function, Robinson
held, was to be exercised apart from any official
connection with the church, as a part of every
believer's duty and privilege.
This position seems to have been unwelcome
to many of Robinson's friends around Norwich,
and one of them, William Euring, copied out the
arguments from "Justification" and gave them
to Rev. John Yates, with the request that they be
publicly refuted by him. From these abstracts,
and a later acquaintance with the book itself,
Yates preached on the matter, and also wrote a
refutation of Robinson's position. The sermon
notes and the manuscript refutation, attested by
a magistrate, were sent to Robinson in Leyden
by William Euring. In reply, Robinson published
"The People's Plea for the Exercise of Prophecy,
against Mr. John Yates his Monopolie. By John
Robinson."2 (1618.)
The treatise itself is one of the most tedious
that we have from Robinson's pen. It consists
^'Justification," 2: 246, 248.
2 Works, 3: 285-335.

214 JOHN ROBINSON
very largely in a detailed exegesis of passages of
Scripture. Robinson stoutly maintains that the
right to speak in public for the purpose of edifying,
exhorting or comforting the church is a duty
laid upon every member as well as upon the
officers of the church. He is obliged to guard
himself from the false position into which his
opponents put him as they reduced his proposition
to the absurdity that every member of a congrega
tion was bound to speak in public. It is only
those male members who have the gift of public
address who are so bound, Robinson holds.
The Leyden congregation seems to have suf
fered from the abuse of privilege even in that early
day, for Robinson says :
" Neither . . . are they that speak in the exer
cise of prophecy to make a sermon by an hour
glass; . . . that were to abuse the time and
wrong the gifts of others; but briefly to speak a
word of exhortation, as God enableth, and that
after the ministerial teaching be ended (as Acts
13), questions about other things delivered, and
with them even disputations." J
One of the most interesting stories in the his
tory of Robinson's congregation in Leyden is*
that which grows out of the offense given to King
' Works, 3:327.

PROSPEROUS YEARS IN LEYDEN 215
James I by Elder William Brewster in the print
ing of Calderwood's odious book, "Perth Assem
bly." We find no mention of the perils of the
ruling elder during these months in any of Rob
inson's writing. And Bradford has given us only
a paragraph concerning the fact that Elder Brew
ster was able, toward the latter part of his stay
in Holland, to set up a place for printing. This
meant that he had the type, and not, it is most
likely, that he had a press. His partner was
Thomas Brewer, who had a house near Robinson's.
We know the general course of this difficulty
between the English and Dutch officials and the
Elder of Robinson's church, from the correspond
ence concerning it which is preserved in the Pub
lic Record Office in London.1 For over a year
following the time when the offensive book was
first found by Sir Dudley Carleton, on July 27,
1619, Brewster was the object of a keen search,
and often escaped narrowly. At one time, about
September 23, 1619, he was supposed to be
safely in the hands of the authorities; but a
drunken officer took the wrong man and Brewster
escaped. Brewer, however, was arrested and the
type seized. At this point the Leyden church
appeared on the scene, offering bail for Brewer's
1 Given in full in Arber, "Story of the Pilgrim Fathers, " pp. 195 ff .

216 JOHN ROBINSON
release and insisting upon the privileges which he
could claim for trial at the university as one of
its members. The students also were stirred up
by the Separatists to claim these privileges for
their fellow. Brewer finally consented to go to
England, and Robinson went with him to Rotter
dam, where he was to take passage for England.
The journey was deferred for some time, owing
to contrary winds. During this time Robinson
had probably returned to Leyden. And we get a
glimpse of the sternness and gravity of their life
there in a letter which Sir Dudley Carleton writes :
"I hope it [the fleet about to sail] will carry
over Sir William Zouche and Master Brewer to
your Honour; who have lain long together at
Flushing; and his fellow Brownists at Leyden
are somewhat scandalized, because they hear Sir
William hath taught him to drink healths."
We can almost hear the chuckle with which these
representatives of King James would speak of this
"fall from grace" on the part of Brewer. It is
quite likely that a knowledge of the weaknesses
of his parishioner may have been the motive which
led Robinson to go with him to Rotterdam.
Brewster never was apprehended. The Ley
den church shielded him successfully. Too much
credit cannot be given Robinson and his congre-

PROSPEROUS YEARS IN LEYDEN 217
gation for their loyal support during that year
of trial.
Robinson was kept busy with the defense of
the Separation from all sorts of attacks. One of
these came from Thomas Helwisse, leader of John
Smyth's church in Amsterdam after his death in
1609. He did not remain long in the pastoral
office, owing to his conviction that flight under
persecution was wrong. Therefore he, with a
considerable number of his followers, returned to
England. From there he published a defense of
himself and his friends in their action under the title,
"A Short Declaration of the Mystery of Iniquity."
(1612.) In this work Helwisse not only advanced
arguments to prove that it was wrong to flee from
persecution and to remain in exile because of it,
but also heaped reproaches upon the Separatist
leaders who had fled to Holland and were remain
ing there under those conditions. He held that
this flight from persecution had resulted in
"the overthrow of religion in this island [Eng
land]; the best, ablest, and greater part being
gone, and leaving behind them some few who, by
the others' departure, have had their affliction
and contempt increased, hath been the cause of
many falling back, and of their adversaries' re
joicing."1 1 A. H. Newman, "A History of the Baptist Churches in the United
States." 1894, pp. 38-47.

218 JOHN ROBINSON
Helwisse made Robinson in particular the object
of his attack1 in this regard, as a leader of the
emigration to escape persecution. In replying
to the charge Robinson gives a clear statement of
the unanimity with which the original movement
to Holland was carried out. He says,
"And for drawing over the people, I know none
of the guides but were as much drawn over by
them as drawing them. The truth is, it was Mr.
Helwisse who above all, either guides or others,
furthered this passage into strange countries : and
if any brought oars, he brought sails." 2
Robinson meets the arguments which Helwisse
advanced from the Scripture example of Jacob,
Moses, David, and Joseph carrying the infant
Jesus into Egypt. The discussion is not signifi
cant enough, however, to delay us longer. It
was one of those over-refinements of scrupulous
conscientiousness which had involved John Smyth
in many troubles and plunged his successor into
woe. It was a sporadic appearance of quite un
warranted criticism.
This matter of flight in times of persecution
did not end Robinson's difficulties with Helwisse.
Smyth and Helwisse went together into the
1 "Of Religious Communion," 3: 160.
2 Works, 3: 159.

PROSPEROUS YEARS IN LEYDEN 219
formation of a new church in Amsterdam on the
basis of another baptism than the one that they
had received. Robinson describes this action
as follows :
"Mr. Smyth, Mr. Helwisse, and the rest, hav
ing utterly dissolved and disclaimed their former
church, came together to erect a new church by
baptism; unto which they also ascribed so great
virtue, as that they would not so much as pray
together before they had it. And after some
straining of courtesy who should begin, and that,
of John Baptist, Matt. 3:14 misalleged, Mr. Smyth
baptized first himself, and next Mr. Helwisse, and
so the rest, making their particular confessions."1
Robinson says that he heard this from Smyth
and Helwisse themselves.
The discussion that follows is interesting chiefly
because of its bearing upon the positions held by
the Separatists relative to those of the Anabap
tists. Joseph Hall, in his first discussion with
Robinson, sought to force him to the Anabap
tist grounds, i.e. that rebaptism is necessary for
those who separate from a church order which
they hold to be false. Hall put the dilemma in
this way:
"If wee bee a true Church, you must returne.
If wee bee not . . . you must rebaptize." 2
1 Works, 3: 168.
2 Hall, "Common Apologie," p. 26.

220 JOHN ROBINSON
Helwisse and his successor, Murton, followed
the same line of argument which Hall used. Hel
wisse carried his charges so far as to assert that,
if the Separatists did not rebaptize they were
" of the world, infidels, haters of Christ, and what
not." He said, in substance, the Separatists call
the Anglicans Babylon, yet they retain the Angli
can baptism, and are thereby sealed into the
covenant of grace by the seal of Babylon. This
charge Robinson met in this proposition:1
"We retain the seal of the covenant of grace,
though ministered in Babylon; and not the bap
tism of Babylon, but the baptism of the Lord in
itself and by the Babylonians spiritually usurped
and profaned; but by faith and the Spirit, now
sanctified to our use."
Baptism has in it two elements, one essential and
the other accidental. The first is the use of water
in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost,
the seal of the covenant of grace ; the other is acci
dental, the manner of administering the essential
rite, which includes the minister, the recipient, and
the communion in which the rite is bestowed.
The essential baptism may be administered and
received in the Roman Catholic or the Anglican
Church, although the manner of administering it be
1 Works, 3: 167.

PROSPEROUS YEARS IN LEYDEN 221
wholly false. If the outer baptism, administered
in a false church order, be nevertheless a sign of
the inner baptism of the Spirit, it is a true spirit
ual ordinance, though abased and abused. Such
the baptism of the Church of England was to the
Separatists, and, therefore, they retain it.
A long discussion concerning the proper subject
of baptism, which Robinson carried on against
Helwisse and Murton, is only a reassertion of the
Separatist principle that the children of parents
who are in covenant relations with God are them
selves comprehended in all the privileges of their
parents, "as the branches in the roots." Infants
are, therefore, proper subjects for baptism. Rob
inson adds nothing new to the familiar arguments
on this point.
Robinson's ministry in Leyden was not con
fined absolutely to his own congregation, although
he always thought of his work as primarily con
cerned with the particular congregation over
which he was set. In reply to Helwisse, however,
Robinson asserted that he had "so preached to
others in those cities, as that by the blessing of
God working with us, we have gained more to
the Lord than Mr. Helwisse 's church consists of."1
These converts in Amsterdam and Leyden must
1 Works, 3: 160.

222 JOHN ROBINSON
have come from English-speaking people, and
were probably from the large number of Puritans
who were resident in Holland either voluntarily
for business reasons or on account of persecution
in England. The fact that Robinson was recog
nized as a preacher of power is indicated by the
fact that David Calderwood, author of the
"Perth Assembly," published in 1619, and so
odious to King James, was a very close friend
of Robinson and accustomed to attend service in
Robinson's church in order to hear him preach.1
Robinson formed many other close friendships
with strong men during these prosperous years in
Leyden. With some of these he agreed and with
some he differed. William Ames, Robert Parker,
David Calderwood and Henry Jacob were mem
bers of the circle of his friends in Leyden. From
them he received many a personal influence which
changed his thought and practice. To one of
them, at least, he gave that peculiar direction
which led him to become the founder of the Inde
pendent churches in England. This was Henry
Jacob. Concerning the peace and order of the Leyden
church there is no question. It was not until
1 Winslow's "Hypocrisie Unmasked," quoted in Dexter, "Congrega
tionalism as Seen," p. 396, note 126.

PROSPEROUS YEARS IN LEYDEN 223
1645 that Robert Baylie of Glasgow, in his "A
Dissuasive from the Errors of the Time," claimed
that Robinson's congregation was nearly destroyed
by internal dissensions. Winslow disputed this in
his "Hypocrisie Unmasked," in 1646, and John
Cotton proved the statement false by his "The
Way of Congregational Churches cleared from the
Historical Aspersions of Mr. Robert Baylie," pub
lished in 1648. Winslow's testimony concerning
the condition of the church in Leyden is worthy
of careful reading:
"For I persuade myself, never people upon
earth lived more lovingly together and parted
more sweetly than we, the Church at Leyden, did ;
not rashly, in a distracted humor, but upon joint
and serious deliberation, often seeking the mind
of God by fasting and prayer; whose gracious
presence we not only found with us, but his bless
ing upon us, from that time to this instant, to the
indignation of our adversaries, the admiration of
strangers, and the exceeding consolation of our
selves, to see such effects of our prayers and tears
before our pilgrimage here be ended." 1
Busy thus with study, controversy, preaching,
parish work, and the sweet intimacies of friendship,
Robinson spent the years in Leyden until he was
called upon to make his last great sacrifice for the
1 Winslow, "Hypocrisie Unmasked," in Young's "Chronicles," 1841,
p. 380.

224 JOHN ROBINSON
Separation and send the stronger part of his con
gregation out upon an enterprise which he had
himself helped to plan for them. This was the
exodus of the Pilgrim Fathers to America, which,
although it seemed to be the pastor's greatest
sacrifice, was destined to be the avenue of his
greatest power.

XI
THE MOVEMENT TO AMERICA

CHAPTER XI
THE MOVEMENT TO AMERICA
In spite of seeming success and prosperity in
Leyden, Robinson and Brewster were both far-
sighted enough to see very clearly that any exten
sion of their ideas concerning church government
was quite impossible among the Dutch. The
persistence of their own congregation, in the face
of influences necessarily springing from an envi
ronment in a strange land, appeared to them quite
improbable also. The reasons which would nat
urally turn the minds of these men, who had known
the hardship and pain of one exile already, to
ward another emigration were complex; but they
may be reduced to three.
The first of these was the danger which threat
ened their cause if they should remain in Holland.
The children of parents who have suffered for a
principle never know fully what such championship
costs, and they hold those principles less tena
ciously than their fathers did. With the third
generation the truth ' once thought worth dying
for becomes far weaker in its grip upon the grand
children. 227

228 JOHN ROBINSON
Another motive was the missionary purpose.
The savages in America offered a fresh field for
the preaching of the gospel; this was a great
motive in all the work of Robinson. When one
of his opponents, Helwisse, charged him with
cowardice in having fled from persecution in Eng
land, Robinson replied with a clear expression of
his view concerning the supreme duty of preach
ing, even in exile. He claimed that no man was
freed from his obligation to preach through the
fact of his exile; but everywhere, even under the
most distressing conditions, the minister must be
a preacher. And Robinson never lost his mis
sionary zeal. 1
There was an additional motive which was very
strong in the minds of Robinson and Brewster.
It was their desire to find a place to live where
their hardships of every kind might be lessened,
in order that many persons, who chose to submit
to the obnoxious ceremonies and the order of the
church established by law in England, rather than
to endure the shame of exile and the hardships of
life in Holland, might come fully into the ranks
of the Separation if those hardships were once re
moved. Robinson perceived the fact that there
were many Puritans who would do this if only
1 Works, 3: 160.

THE MOVEMENT TO AMERICA 229
they "might have liberty and live comfortably."
This point must not be underestimated in con
sidering the purpose which induced the Leyden
church to undertake the emigration. It undoubt
edly played a very large part in Robinson's plans.
And when we consider the weight which he gave
to this reason in the light of the later history of
the colonies in Massachusetts, we must be struck
with the sagacity of Robinson. Exactly what he
expected to happen did happen, and the Puritans
became Separatists when, in America, the hard
ships of the Dutch life were removed. Robin
son's analysis of the situation was remarkable
for its clearness and foresight. It probably rested
in no slight degree upon what he had himself seen
in Leyden, where, under his own preaching, the
Separation had made decided gains among the
English-speaking residents. If this measure of
success were possible in Leyden, how much more
so under better conditions in America!
The idea was not entirely new. As early as
1597 members of the Barrowist group of Separa
tists in London petitioned to be allowed to form
part of a projected colony in America, and Francis
and George Johnson were allowed to go. But the
whole expedition was a failure. 1 This very failure
1 Dexter, "Congregationalism as Seen," pp. 277, 278.

230 JOHN ROBINSON
was used as a taunt against Robinson by Joseph
Hall, who said that the Separatists had been
turbulent alike at home, in prison, in the
Netherlands and "in the coasts of Virginia."
There is no doubt that the movement itself
originated in the minds of Robinson and Brew
ster, "out of their Christian care of the flock of
Christ committed to them." : The plan was
thoroughly debated by Robinson and Brewster,
and then was broached to certain more influen
tial members of the congregation. After private
discussion the matter was publicly proposed and
debated. The congregation sought to know the
will of God in the matter by fasting and prayer
no less than by careful examination of the whole
project from the standpoint of human wisdom.
This general method of proceeding is a practical
illustration of the definite theory concerning the
place of officers in the conduct of church affairs
which Robinson consistently held. They took the
lead; they discussed all projects fully; but the final
decision of all questions rested with the church.
There seemed to be common agreement on the
expediency of another move. The most desirable
place to which to go involved the largest difficulty
in settlement. Many were in favor of Guiana,
1 Winslow, ' ' Hypocrisie Unmasked, "pp. 88, 89.

THE MOVEMENT TO AMERICA , 231
because the climate was tropical and life would
be easy there. Others were stoutly inclined to
ward Virginia, because the English already had
a foothold there, and it was not so thoroughly a
movement into a foreign land. The objection to
Virginia was that there also they would be liable
to persecution on religious grounds. The final
decision was " to live as a distinct body by them
selves, under the general government of Virginia;"
to petition King James to grant them freedom in
religion, and, if this should be granted, to carry
the enterprise forward, inasmuch as they had good
hopes under such favorable conditions of backing
from "Great Persons of good rank and quality." 2
In carrying out this general plan the Leyden
brethren began by sending Robert Cushman and
John Carver to England to begin negotiations in
1617. The story of these negotiations in detail
as they were carried forward in England does not
concern our narrative. We will therefore only
touch upon a point here and there in which it is
possible to discover the signs of Robinson's activ
ity in the matter. It is plain from the outset that
Robinson and Brewster together were the persons
of prime influence and authority in the project.
They signed the articles which were sent by the
1 Bradford, "Of Plimoth Plantation," pp. 36, 37.

232 JOHN ROBINSON
Leyden church to Cushman and Carver for use in
advancing their cause with the king. These arti
cles : were doubtless drawn up by Robinson about
November, 1617. They minimize the differences
between the Separatists and members of the
Church of England, and are in every way con
ciliatory and fraternal. The distinctive note of
Robinson's teaching is the second article, which
says: "As we do acknowledge the doctrine of faith
there [i. e. in the Church of England] taught, so
do we [acknowledge] the fruits and effects of the
same doctrine, to the begetting of saving faith in
thousands in the land (Conformists and Reform
ists), as they are called, with whom also as with
our brethren we do desire to keep spiritual com
munion in peace, and will practice on our parts
all lawful things."
The delegates gained the help of Sir Edwin
Sandys, and the articles were used very success
fully in carrying forward the plans. In a letter
in December, 1617, Sir Edwin Sandys wrote to
Robinson and Brewster reporting progress in the
plans and commending the delegates, who were
about to return to Leyden for instructions.
To make clear the points which were obscure
or unsatisfactory, Robinson and Brewster drew
1 See N. Y. Hist. Soe. Coll., Series 2, Vol. 3, pp. 295-302.

THE MOVEMENT TO AMERICA 23a
up a statement, which was signed by a majority
of the congregation. This was sent to the Council
for Virginia by Carver and Cushman. They also
sent a letter, in December, 1617, to Sir Edwin
Sandys, expressing their personal gratitude to him
for his services already rendered, and urging him
to continue to help them.
But the king would not grant the Separatists
religious freedom in explicit terms and under his
seal. He went so far as to say, "that he would
connive at them, and not molest them, provided
they carried themselves peaceably." The Vir
ginia Company sought to persuade the Leyden
brethren to go on, trusting that everything would
be as they wished in spite of the king's refusal
positively to sanction their religious freedom.
When the agents returned to Leyden with this
report there was a division of opinion in the church.
Probably the majority were inclined to believe
that this promise of King James was altogether
too insecure a foundation upon which to risk a
move which involved the selling of household
goods and a long, perilous journey into a strange
land. It was natural enough that this should be so.
These men had learned prudence because they had
suffered much.
On the other hand, "some of the Chiefest"

234 JOHN ROBINSON
thought that they were quite warranted in pro
ceeding even upon this very uncertain consent
of the king. Among the "Chiefest" was surely
enough Robinson, and Bradford gives us a little
of his reasoning in the matter, which shows that
he knew the character of kings, and of James in
particular, pretty thoroughly. He argued that
there was no special difference between the prom
ises of King James, whether they were intimated
¦or confirmed:
"For if, afterwards, there should be a purpose
or desire to wrong them [the Separatists], though
they had a seal as broad as the house floor, it would
not serve the turn; for there would be means
enough found to recall or reverse it. And seeing
therefore the course was probable, they must rest
herein on God's Providence, as they had done in
other things."
A long time was consumed in the settling of
these contrary opinions in Leyden. It was not
until early in 1619 that Brewster and Cushman
were sent to England to proceed with the Vir
ginia Company and close also with the merchants
who were to furnish or "adventure" the money
for the ships and supplies. They found the Com
pany in a hopeless wrangle. A patent was granted,
however, June 19, 1619. But the long delays had
disappointed their friends as well as themselves;

THE MOVEMENT TO AMERICA 235
the merchants were no longer ready with their
means. This patent never was used, for the Vir
ginia Company was unable to lend any financial
aid, and this was absolutely necessary to the Ley
den brethren.
It was early in the year 1620 that the Leyden
church, evidently discouraged at the seeming
failure of their efforts in England, turned to the
directors of the Dutch New Netherland Company
for help. On the 11th of April, 1620, the States
General rejected a petition of these directors,
dated February 12, 1620, a paragraph of which
refers to this action of the Leyden men. It is as
follows: "Now it happens that there is residing at Ley
den a certain English Preacher, versed in the
Dutch language, who is well inclined to proceed
thither to live: assuring the Petitioners that he
has the means of inducing over four hundred fam
ilies to accompany him thither, both out of this
country and England. Provided they would be
guarded and preserved from all violence on the
part of other potentates, by the authority and
under the protection of your Princely Excellency
and the High and Mighty Lords States General,
in the propagation of the true pure Christian
religion, in the instruction of the Indians in that
country in true learning, and in converting them
to the Christian faith: and thus, through the

236 JOHN ROBINSON
mercy of the Lord, to the greater glory of this
country, to plant there a new Commonwealth."1
The directors petitioned that "the aforesaid
Minister," in whom we recognize Robinson, to
gether with the families who were ready to follow
him, be taken under Dutch protection and that
two ships be sent to secure for that country the
New Netherland, between New France and Vir
ginia. The petition was rejected, but another series
of negotiations was begun with the Dutch imme
diately. This, however, was broken off by Rob
inson before April 11, 1620, at the request of a
London merchant, Mr. Thomas Weston, to whose
counsel Robinson took heed. 2 Weston had
known the members of the Leyden congregation
before, and now, after conferring with Robinson 3
and other influential members of the congrega
tion, he persuaded them to go on with their
plans, leaving xthe Dutch and depending upon the
Virginia Company.
The details of the plan at length agreed upon
need not concern us now. There were many
vexations, uncertainties and trials attending the
organization of the movement, but the resolution
1 Arber, " The Story," etc., pp. 297, 298.
2 See Robinson's letter to Carver, in Arber, "The Story," etc., p. 317.
s Bradford, "Of Plimoth Plantation," p. 54.

THE MOVEMENT TO AMERICA 237
of the church was carried out in spite of all these.
That final resolution was made at the close of a
public fast, when it was decided : that the younger
and stronger, volunteers only, should go first,
and the remainder stay behind; that if the major
ity should volunteer to go, Pastor Robinson was
to accompany them; if the minority went, Elder
Brewster was to go; if the enterprise should be a
success, then those who went should help the aged
and poor who remained in Holland to come over
to New England later.
The majority decided to remain, although the
excess was only a few, and therefore Robinson
remained behind and Brewster went with the
minority. The church was curiously divided.
They agreed to resolve themselves into distinct
churches, although Robinson was still their
pastor, and in case any came from Holland to
America, or returned, they were to be received
as members of the other body with no letter
of dismission or commendation required. The
organization of the church in this way is quite
anomalous. But the whole purpose was to bring
the united company together in the near future
in the new home, and this doubtless seemed to
warrant so strange a scheme of church order.
So the time drew near for the separation of the

238 JOHN ROBINSON
little church. Winslow and Bradford describe
the last meeting at Leyden on the evening of
July 30, 1620. It was a day of great joy and
sadness alike. Winslow says that those who were
to remain in Holland "feasted us that were to
go, at our Pastor's house, [it] being large," and
describes the effect of the singing as " the sweet
est melody that ever mine ears heard," for many
of the congregation were very expert at music.
Bradford speaks of the event as "a Day of Sol
emn Humiliation," when Robinson preached a
sermon which was drawn from Ezra 8 : 21, and with
which "he spent a good part of the day very
profitably and suitable to their present condition."
The next day, Friday, July 31, 1620, they
left Leyden and, accompanied by the larger part
of those who were to remain behind, went to
Delfshaven, where they were to go on board the
ship that was waiting for them. Here several
friends from Amsterdam met them, and they
spent the evening together. Robinson was still
with his church.
The next morning, August 1, they went on
board the ship. Every moment was spent in
leave-taking. "But the tide, which stays for no man, calling
them away that were thus loath to depart; their

THE MOVEMENT TO AMERICA 239
Reverend Pastor, falling down on' his knees, and
they all with him, with watery cheeks, commended
them, with most fervent prayers, to the Lord and
his blessing. And then, with mutual embraces
and many tears, they took their leaves one of
another; which proved to be the last leave to
many of them." 1
These closing scenes in the history of the Leyden
church, thus together for the last time on the soil
of Holland, have been a favorite subject for the
imaginative lover of the story. Robinson has been
described as taking leave of the members of his
flock in different ways and places; but however
varied the objective setting of the scene, one point
is surely fixed and clear. It was a day of the
deepest significance to Robinson himself. Years
afterward the memory of it was clear to Bradford.
It must have been an hour of anguish to Robin
son. Here were the strongest members of the
church which he had built up and served, a numer
ical minority, indeed, but the very flower and
strength of his congregation, about to leave him
and set out upon a new enterprise, filled with
peril. Aside from any question of personal dis
appointment at the decision concerning himself,
it was a time of inexpressible sorrow to the heart
of the faithful pastor. Bradford's words picture
1 Bradford, "Of Plimoth Plantation," p. 73.

240 JOHN ROBINSON
the passionate grief of the scene very plainly.
That last prayer and the concluding benediction
were poured out from a great, sympathetic heart,
which had without question intuitively appre
hended to some degree the suffering which did take
place during the next winter on the bleak slopes
at Plymouth. There are few places in all this
story where the greatness and strength of Robin
son appear more vividly than in this hour of almost
sacrificial anguish, when he bade the flower of his
church that last farewell at Delfshaven.

XII
THE SO-CALLED "FAREWELL ADDRESS"

CHAPTER XII
THE SO-CALLED " FARE WELL ADDRESS "
At this point in the narrative we must take up
a detailed examination of that address or ser
mon which Robinson is reported by Winslow to
have delivered to the members of his church who
were about to depart for America. This has
become the best known utterance and episode in
the whole life of Robinson, on account of the dis
cussion which has gathered around the phrase
"more light," which is used by Winslow in his
report. The source of our knowledge of the occasion
and the words which Robinson used is in the
defense which was made by Edward Winslow in
behalf of the colonies against Samuel Gorton and
others, in the year 1646. The mission of meeting
the charges was entrusted to Winslow by the
colony in view of the seriousness of the attack
which had been made upon it. Two points must,
be kept clearly in view from the outset. The
first is the date of Winslow's book. It was not.
published until the year 1646, and, therefore,
243

244 JOHN ROBINSON
our knowledge of the "Farewell Address," as
we will hereafter call it, comes from a source
which bears a date over twenty-five years after
the occasion on which it was delivered. This
item of time may mean much or little, according
to the reasons we may have for believing that
there was any special purpose for which the Address
would have been remembered or preserved. The
second point is this: Winslow's book is apolo
getic in its purpose. It is designed to meet seri
ous charges with sufficient arguments. It is not
a set of annals or a history to which we must go
for our knowledge of the Address, but an apolo
getic treatise in the interests of Separatists 1 in
which the author, under a special commission,
replies to objections against New England which
prevailed in the mother country. There were
several of these, among which was this :
1 The full title of this book is interesting enough to warrant its reprint
here. It is: HYPOCRISIE VNMASKED: By A True Relation of the
Proceedings of the Governour and Company of the Massachusetts against
Sam vel Gorton, (and his Accomplices), a notorious disturber of the Peace
and quiet of the severall Governments wherein he lived : With the grounds
and reasons thereof, examined and allowed by their Generall Court
holden at Boston in New England, in November last, 1646. Together
with a particular Answer to the manifold slanders and abominable false
hoods which are contained in a Book written by the said Gorton, and en
tituled Simplicities Defence against Seven-headed Policy, &c. Discover
ing to the view of all whose eyes are open, his manifold Blasphemies; as
also the dangerous agreement which he and his Accomplices made with
ambitious and treacherous Indians, who at the same time were deeply
engaged in a desperate Conspiracy to cut off all the rest of the English in

"FAREWELL ADDRESS" 245
"because (say they) the Church of Plymouth,
which went first from Leyden, were schismatics,
Brownists, rigid Separatists, &c, having Mr.
Robinson for their pastor wdio made and to the
last professed separation from other the churches
of Christ, &c. And the rest of the Churches in
New England, holding communion with that
church, are to be reputed such as they are. "
Against this common false statement, Winslow
advanced four counter arguments. These were:
1. Robinson's daily teaching in his ministry,
under which Winslow lived in Leyden from 1617
to 1620, which always was against separation from
any of the Reformed churches. 2. The "Apol
ogy," published in English and Latin, and easy
to be had in either language at that time
(1646). 3. The common practice of the Leyden
church in allowing communion with the Reformed
churches, many instances of which Winslow gives.
4. And, finally, the "wholesome counsel" that
the other Plantations. Whereunto is added a, Briefe Narration (occa
sioned by certain aspersions) of the true grounds or cause of the first
Planting of New England; the Precedent of their Churches in the way and
worship of God ; their Communion with the Reformed Churches ; and
their practise towards those that dissent from them in matters of Religion
and Church Government. By EDWARD WINSLOW. Psalm cxx.
3, 4. "What shall be given unto thee, or what shall be done unto thee,
thou false tongue? Sharp arrows of the mighty, with coals of juniper. "
Published by Authority. LONDON. Printed by Rich. Cotes for John
Bellamy at the Three Golden Lions in Cornhill, neare the Royall Ex
change. 1646.

246 JOHN ROBINSON
Robinson gave to the exiles previous to their
departure, which was proof positive that the
charge was false.
The "wholesome counsel" is quoted as follows:
"In the next place, for the wholesome counsell
Mr. Robinson gave that part of the Church whereof
he was Pastor, at their departure from him to
begin the great worke of Plantation in ./Veiy Eng
land, amongst other wholesome Instructions and
Exhortations, hee used these expressions, or to
the same purpose; We are now ere long to part
asunder, and the Lord knoweth whether ever he
should live to see our faces again; but whether
the Lord had appointed it or not, he charged us
before God and his blessed Angels, to follow him
no further than he followed Christ. And if God
should reveal anything to us by any other instru
ment of his, to be as ready to receive it, as ever
we were to receive any truth by his Ministry : For
he was very confident the Lord had more truth
and light yet to breake forth out of his holy Word.
He took occasion also miserably to bewaile the
state and condition of the Reformed churches, who
were come to a period in Religion, and would
goe no further than the instruments of their Refor
mation : As for example, the Lutherans they could
not be drawne to goe beyond what Luther saw,
for whatever part of God's will he had further
imparted and revealed to Calvin, they will rather
die than embrace it. And so also, saith he, you
see the Calvinists, they stick where he left them;

"FAREWELL ADDRESS" 247
A misery much to bee lamented; For though they
were precious shining lights in their time, yet God
had not revealed his whole will to them : And were
they now living, saith hee, they would bee as
ready and willing to embrace further light, as
that they had received. Here also he put us in
mind of our Church-Covenant (at least that part
of it) whereby wee promise and covenant with
God and one with another, to receive whatsoever
light or truth shall be made known to us from his
written Word: but withall exhorted us to take
heed what we received for truth, before we received
it. For, saith he, It is not possible the Christian
world should come so lately out of such thick Anti
christian darknesse, and that full perfection of knowl
edge should breake forth at once."1
This is the original and the only source of our
knowledge of the words of Robinson which com
pose the Farewell Address. All other reports go
back to this,2 and the discussion of the trust
worthiness of our knowledge of the Address is
concerned solely with Winslow's report.
As to the time when the Farewell Address was
delivered, we cannot determine precisely. There
were several fasts held by the church in connection
with the emigration. One was at the time when
1 See Young's " Chronicles," 1841, p. 396. Quoted in Dexter " Con
gregationalism as Seen, " p. 404.
2 Mather, "Magnalia," 1: 14. Neal, "History of N. E.," 1: 77.
Belknap, "American Biography," 2: 172.

248 JOHN ROBINSON
the final decision was made concerning the num
ber who were to go. It may have been then that
Robinson preached a sermon from the text, "And
David's men said vnto him, See, we be af rayed
here in Judah, how much more if we come to Kei-
lah against the hoste of the Philistims? Then
David asked counsell of the Lorde againe. And
the Lorde answered him, and saide, Arise, go
downe to Keilah: for I wil deliuer the Philistims
into thine hand." (1 Sam. xxiii. 3, 4. Genevan
Version.) It seems less probable, however, that the Ad
dress belongs here than that it was a part of some
later sermon. The words "we are now ere long
to part asunder," would seem to indicate an event
near the embarkation, either the farewell feast at
Robinson's house in Leyden, or the leave-taking
at Delfshaven before the embarkation of those who
were to sail for America. The more probable of
these two occasions is the former, since the final
meeting at Delfshaven seems to have been a short
one, and chiefly occupied by Robinson's prayer.
Therefore this wholesome counsel may have been a
part of the sermon which Robinson preached from
the text, "And there at the Riuer, by Ahaua, I
proclaymed a fast, that we might humble ourselueB
before our God, and seeke of him a ryght way for

"FAREWELL ADDRESS" 249-
vs, and for our children, and for all our substance."
(Ezra 8:21. Genevan Version.)
There seems to have been no doubt entertained
concerning the reliable character of Winslow's
report until George Sumner published a note on
the matter at the close of his " Memoirs of the Pil
grims at Leyden. " x Sumner did not deem the
evidence sufficient to warrant him in branding
Winslow's report as false; but the whole report
seemed to him somewhat open to question. For
Winslow, he pointed out, gives the report freely,
after a lapse of twenty-five or twenty-six years,
and there is no other report of the discourse to be
found anywhere. The pages of Bradford, con
temporary controversy, and the records of the
Leyden-Plymouth church are alike silent in the
matter. Winslow does not say whether his report
of the wholesome counsel is from notes, or whether
he is simply recording a memory.
But there is no special reason why this discourse
should have been copied into the church records
or accurately reported from notes, unless there
was something startling or peculiar in it. It re
quires no special feat of memory for a man who
had been for three years a listener to a person's
preaching, to give a reliable report, even after
1 See "Mass. Hist. Soe. Coll.," Series 3, Vol. ix, pp. 70, 71.

250 JOHN ROBINSON
twenty-six years, of an address which was sig
nificant at the time only because it emphasized
with unusual clearness something which had been
all the while central and explicit in the preacher's
thought and practice.
Hence we are driven back to the matter of inter
nal evidence. And here we find that there is
nothing novel in the subject matter of the report
which Winslow gives. There are parallels to every
statement of the Farewell Address in the writings
of Robinson. One who never had read the sources
might be surprised at Winslow's report, but one
who knows Robinson intimately is not. Here is
no foreign note; here is no surprise. The Farewell
Address is precisely what we should expect to find.
The fact that it appears in a report, informally
given a quarter of a century after the event, does
not awaken suspicion as to its genuineness in the
mind of one who has read thoroughly the preserved
writings of Robinson. We are confident that Rob
inson is correctly reported for substance of doc
trine by Winslow.
The central point in the whole Address is the
matter of "more light," which Robinson felt sure
was yet to break forth from the Bible. To what
did he refer? This brings us to the interpretation
of the Farewell Address, and we must begin at

"FAREWELL ADDRESS" 251
once by taking up the most significant one ever
attempted. This was by Dr. Henry Martyn Dex
ter.1 His purpose was polemic. This is per
fectly evident from the way in which he implies
an antagonist throughout his discussion. He says,
Robinson "has been persistently put wrong by
those who, never having much studied his writ
ings and unfamiliar with the real judgment, doc
trine and spirit of the man, have interpreted him
too much in the light of their own temper and
times, and too little in that of those which were
actual with him. " And " it is impossible that he
should have spoken to the Plymouth men in the
sense in which he has been commonly reputed
to have spoken. Nothing short of insanity could
have made him teach after the fashion of the self-
styled 'advanced thinkers' of to-day."
Dr. Dexter seeks to show that there was in Rob
inson "a habit of mind irreconcilably at variance
with the fundamental principles of modern ration
alism." He also speaks of "that high pedestal
whereon the late generations — and more especially
the heterodox among them — have delighted to
exalt him as the apostle of a thought so progres
sive as to be quite out of sight of his own time, and
the prophet of a liberalism having unlimited capac
ity to 'embrace further light.' "
1 "Congregationalism as Seen," pp. 400-410.

252 JOHN ROBINSON
From these quotations it will be seen at once
that Dr. Dexter 's purpose in his critical examina
tion of the Farewell Address is to meet the claim
made by the Unitarian and liberal theologians
of the past century, that Robinson was an early
prophet of their temper and progress in matters of
doctrine. This was a claim which a man of Dr.
Dexter 's temper would not brook without protest,
and this protest takes shape in the interpretation
of the Address which we will now proceed to
examine. The interpretation itself has met both favor
and discredit. Dr. Dexter was a scholar of such
large resource that he carried great weight in such
an argument as he here presents. That argument
has been welcomed by some who are distressed
to hear Robinson claimed by so-called "liberals";
by others, and now probably by the large majority,
irrespective of class or label, the interpretation
has been rejected. But we do not know where Dr.
Dexter 's interpretation has itself been subjected
to a critical examination. And this must be done
before it is possible to maintain any ground.
Let us go over Dr. Dexter 's argument.
His first attempt is to show that John Robin
son was a defender of the creed of the Synod of
Dort, both as regards the general theological posi-

"FAREWELL ADDRESS" 253
tions maintained by that great creed, and also as
regards "that animus of infallibility and inex-
posure to essential future modification in which it
held them" [i. e. those positions]. Here we must
keep two points in mind. The first is the body
of doctrine itself; the second is its "animus of
infallibility." That Robinson was in hearty agreement with
the doctrine, his "Defence" bears abundant wit
ness. It is a whole-hearted championship of the
articles. But that he anywhere sanctioned the
"animus of infallibility," or that he recognized
such an " animus" to exist is utterly without war
rant from any statement contained in the treatise
just mentioned.
Dr. Dexter does not seek to prove his point from
the "Defence," but turns to Robinson's "Essays"
in order to display there the signs of a habit of
mind which would lead us to feel sure that Rob
inson never held the possibility of progress in doc
trine, although he might grant such a possibility
in respect to polity.
Just here we must make one clear distinction
and insist that it be held. There is a difference
between the final and complete authority of the
Scriptures per se, and the perfect and unchange
able authority of human comprehension of the

254 JOHN ROBINSON
Scriptures. That difference was recognized by
John Robinson. When we assert it, we are not
putting into his mind a modern distinction of
which he was ignorant. We find it on page after
page of his writings.
Dr. Dexter is quite right in bringing the quota
tions which he does from the "Essays" to show
that Robinson believed that the Scriptures " carry
their authoritie in their mouthes." Robinson most
surely holds that "Divine Authoritie is to sway
with us above all Reason: yea Reason teacheth
that God is both to be beleeved and obeyed in the
things for which man can see no Reason. "
But no quotation brought by Dr. Dexter touches
the question as to whether there might not be a
legitimate place for reason in the search for
authority, or whether there might not be a pro
gressive and enlarging grasp of divine truth itself.
The fact that nothing of the sort is advanced by
Dr. Dexter compels us to go to Robinson's writ
ings to see if such quotations may not be found.
And we do not need to seek far. In the very
essay, "Of Authority and Reason," from which
Dr. Dexter quotes to justify his contention, we
find this explicit statement by Robinson:1
"The custom of the Church is but the custom
1 "Essays" in Works, 1: 56.

" FAREWELL ADDRESS" 255
of men : the sentence of the fathers but the opin
ion of men: the determination of councils but the
judgments of men, what men soever. And so, if
all men in the world, not immediately directed,
as were extraordinary prophets, and apostles, in
whom the Spirit spake and testified by them,
should consent in one, as they, notwithstanding
their multitude, were but men, though many, so
was their testimony but human, though of many
men; neither could it challenge any other than
human assent unto it; and not that neither [i. e.
either] absolutely, either in matters of discourse
of reason, wherein it is possible that men should
deceive themselves; or of relation from others,
by whom they may be deceived. We are there
fore to beware that we neither wrong ourselves
by credulity, nor others by unjust suspicion."
This would surely seem to settle once for all
Robinson's acceptance of "the animus of infal
libility" which went with the decrees of the Dort
Council. But let us supplement this by another
quotation. In his "Justification of Separation,"
he says :
" But on the other side [that is, instead of giving
great weight to the opinions of other men in every
matter] for a man so far to suffer his thoughts to
be conjured into the circle of any mortal man or
men's judgment, as either to fear to try what is
offered to the contrary, in the balance of the sanc
tuary, or finding it to bear weight, to fear to give

256 JOHN ROBINSON
sentence on the Lord's side, yea though it be
against the mighty, this is -to honour men above
God, and to advance a throne above the throne of
Christ, who is Lord and King forever. And to
speak that in this case, which by doleful experience
I myself have found, many of the most forward
professors in the Kingdom are well nigh as super-
stitiously addicted to the determinations of their
guides and teachers, as the ignorant papists unto
theirs, accounting it not only needless curiosity,
but even intolerable arrogancy, to call into ques
tion the things received from them by tradition."1
Before making a deduction from these quota
tions, it will be well to recall the fact that Robin
son himself bears witness to the bondage in which
he was held for a long time to the opinions of men
more learned than himself. His utterances just
quoted grew out of his OAvn experience.
From the above it cannot fail to be obvious
that, while Robinson insisted upon the Scripture
as the final authority in all matters of both doctrine
and polity, he did not hold that the decrees of any
council were infallible. Nor do we find that there
is the least warrant for Dr. Dexter 's preliminary
proposition that the " ethical and theological posi
tion of Mr. Robinson's mind" rendered it inca
pable of receiving "more light" in matters of
doctrine. 1 Works, 2: 52.

" FAREWELL ADDRESS " 257
Instead of this, the presumption would seem
to be sufficiently clear that the heart and mind of
Robinson were open to all light from all sources
shed from or upon the final authority, the Word
of God.
When Dr. Dexter passes to the specific argu
ment drawn from the purpose which the Farewell
Address serves in Winslow's "Hypocrisie Un
masked," there can be no question of the fact that
he establishes his contention. It is in an argu
ment concerning the polity and not concerning
the doctrine of the Leyden church that Winslow
introduces his report of the Address. Dr. Dexter
argues with his usual command of convincing
logic, and the point is well taken. But suppose
it is made. And suppose we grant the force of an
argument, from the specific setting of the Address
as it is reported to us, which "makes polity and
not dogma the key-note of this still noble farewell. "
Have we thereby proved that our presumptions
are quite unwarranted by the facts, and that
Robinson was a man unable to see farther in mat
ters of doctrine, however liberal he might have
been in matters of polity? Not in the least. We
cannot reach such a conclusion until we look at
the place in his whole teaching which this idea of
"more light" occupied.

258 JOHN ROBINSON
We must observe that the idea is not peculiar
to Robinson among the Separatists, although in
him it reaches its most frequent use and best illus
tration. Bradford says that " the light of ye word
of God" was the means by which the zealous con
verts to the preaching of the faithful Puritan pas
tors were led to their final position as Separatists.
The same idea lay embedded in the very cen
ter of the first simple covenants by virtue of
which the Separatists came into organic union as
churches. The covenant was supremely impor
tant with them. They did not insist upon any
tests of creed. They were able to take doctrinal
soundness for granted on the part of all those
who sought their fellowship. The covenant was
made the instrument by which they united. Its
terms were perfectly clear. As the Lord's free
people they joined themselves by a covenant
with the Lord into a church of gospel fellowship,
pledging themselves to walk in all God's ways,
made known or to be made known unto them.1
The covenant of Henry Jacob's church, organized
in 1616 in London, which probably represents
Robinson's teaching with complete fidelity, was
"to walk together in all God's ways and ordi
nances, according as he had already revealed, or
'(Bradford, "Of Plimoth Plantation," p. 13.

"FAREWELL ADDRESS" 259
should further make them known to them."1
It is a pretty large assumption to claim that all
these expressions of the possibility of more
knowledge of divine, truth to come in the future
can apply only to matters of church order. In
the words of the Farewell Address Robinson is
simply recalling his hearers to the terms and
to the anticipations of their own sacred cove
nants. It is exactly the sort of counsel that we
expect from a pastor to a people united in such
covenants as those just referred to.
We turn now to certain definite statements from
Robinson's own writings for a closer view of his
general teaching.
In his first controversy with Hall, he says:
"We do freely, and with all thankfulness, ac
knowledge every good thing she [the Church of
England] hath, and which ourselves have there
received. . . . But what then? Should we still
have continued in sin, that grace might have
abounded? If God have caused a further truth,
like a light in a dark place, to shine in our hearts,
should we still have mingled that light with dark
ness, contrary to the Lord's own practice (Gen.
i. 4) and express precept (2 Cor. vi. 14)? " 2
In the controversy with Bernard, Robinson
1 Walker, "Creeds and Platforms, " p. 116.
'Works, 3:407.

260 JOHN ROBINSON
tells how he studied the arguments for the Sep
aration as based upon the Scriptures, "and by
searching found much light of truth." He did
not follow it immediately, however, because his
respect for the opinions of men whom he deemed
wiser than himself was so great that he almost
"suffered the light of God to have been put out
... by other men's darkness."1 It is impos
sible to confine this illumination to doctrine as
over against polity. Indeed, there was no such
distinction possible in the mind of Robinson. We
make the distinction between creed and polity
very easily. John Robinson did not make that
distinction. To him polity was a part of doctrine;
the order of the true church was an object of faith.
Polity was not something of incidental value;
it was essential to the body of true Christian
doctrine. God had revealed in his Testament a
form for the Church, which was an essential part
of the whole revelation of salvation. We have
no right to make a distinction for Robinson
which he never would have made for himself.
Let us turn to a later controversy, represented
by his book "Of Religious Communion." In it
he says :
" I profess myself always one of them, who still
'Works, 2:52.

"FAREWELL ADDRESS" 261
desire to learn further, or better, what the good
will of God is. And I beseech the Lord from
mine heart, that there may be in the men (to
wards whom I desire in all things lawful to enlarge
myself) the like readiness of mind to forsake every
evil way, and faithfully to embrace and walk in
the truth they do, or may see, as by the mercy of
God, there is in me; which as I trust it shall be
mine, so do I wish it may be their comfort also in
the day of the Lord Jesus." x
We will take only one more illustration. This
is from the last years of his life on earth:
" We ought to be firmly persuaded in our hearts
of the truth, and goodness of the religion which
we profess in all things; yet as knowing ourselves
to be men, whose property it is to err and to be
deceived in many things; and accordingly both
to converse with men in that modesty of mind,
as always to desire to learn something better, or
further, by them, if it may be; as also to beg at
God's hands the pardon of our errors (Psa. xix.
12) and aberrations, which may be, and are secret
in us, and we not aware thereof."2
Now, in the light of these expressions, we are
bound to interpret the Farewell Address. With
out question Robinson's great concern always
was with polity rather than with dogma. But
to conclude that therefore he was a man with a
'Works, 3: 103.
2 Ibid., 1:39.

262 JOHN ROBINSON
mind not open toward the truth as to theological
doctrine is a wholly unwarranted position. We
must consent to regard him as possessing a mind
of more consistency than that. The man who
said, "Whatsoever truth is in the world, it is
from God, by what hand soever it be reached
unto us" was not a lover of light in church polity
and a sympathizer with the "animus of infalli
bility" in doctrine. Dr. Dexter 's interpretation
of the Farewell Address is inadequate. Winslow
used the Address for an apologetic purpose, and
its meaning was undoubtedly limited for that
occasion to that purpose. Dr. Dexter, provoked
by a too hasty appropriation of Robinson by the
liberals, has interpreted the Farewell Address
in a case of special pleading for a polemic purpose.
Neither Dr. Dexter nor Governor Winslow has
set the Farewell into the body of Robinson's
larger teaching. This we have endeavored to do.
And we have found that "more light" does rep
resent the whole man, John Robinson. What posi
tion he would have held in doctrinal matters had
he lived in another age we do not know. It would
be folly to guess. But the temper of the great
Congregationalist was that of a seeker after the
light of truth in every department of its revela
tion. The tendency of his age directed his growth

"FAREWELL ADDRESS" 263
in the practical rather than the dogmatic line.
But he was preeminently and consistently a man
of open, hospitable spirit to all truth by whatever
hand reached to him or through whatever light
revealed. This always has been the conviction of the hearts
of Congregationalists. Dr. Dexter 's interpreta
tion was maintained with all the power of his
masterful mind, and it swayed the head by its
logic against what the heart felt to be true. This
examination of the matter warrants the expec
tation that the head and heart may consent in a
judgment which restores Robinson to his rightful
place in the history of the Congregational churches.

XIII
THE ESSAYS

CHAPTER XIII
THE ESSAYS
It would be impossible to form a correct im
pression of John Robinson's personality from a
study of his practical enterprises, his controver
sies and his friendships alone. There is another
source from which it is a pleasant task to draw.
In 1625 there were published two editions of a
volume entitled, " Observations Divine and Moral,
Collected out of the Holy Scriptures, Ancient and
Modern Writers, both divine and human; as also
out of the Great Volume of Men's Manners: tend
ing to the Furtherance of Knowledge and Virtue.
By John Robinson." The same book was after
ward published, under different titles, in 1628,
1638, 1642 and 1654. The last edition did not
bear Robinson's name, but was put forth as "by a
Student in Theologie." The edition used in Robin
son's collected works is that of 1628. It occupies
pages 1 to 259 in the first volume, from which the
citations in this chapter will be made. The title
here is "New Essays, or Observations," etc. The
work is best known as the "Essays." They repre-
267

268 JOHN ROBINSON
sent the ripe results of Robinson's careful obser
vations, summed up and reasoned upon during
the last years of his life in Leyden. They are,
therefore, the result of his mature thought in the
very prime of his life. And, if we are to judge
from the number of editions put out, this is alto
gether his most significant book in regard to its
literary value. It can hardly be classed with his
other writings. It is wholly different in purpose.
It reveals its author in a new light.
In the preface to the volume, Robinson gives
us a clear view of that which he regarded as the
sources of human knowledge. First of all came
the Holy Scriptures; next, the great literature of
all ages and the utterances of the great men of
the time, which Robinson had read or heard and
then "stored up as a precious treasure," not only
for his own good but also for the good of others;
and, finally, he studied the "great volume of
men's manners," a wide acquaintance with which
he felt that he had enjoyed during the days of his
pilgrimage. "Now this kind of study and meditation," he
says, " hath been unto me full sweet and delight
ful, and that wherein I have often refreshed my
soul and spirit, amidst many sad and sorrowful
thoughts, unto which God hath called me."

THE ESSAYS 269
The little preface to the volume thus gives us
a view of Robinson's mind and temper which we
do not obtain from the sterner and narrower
method which he employed in his controversial
writings. Here we see a really catholic mind
laying hold of all the spiritual riches of literature
and life, pondering them for his own joy and profit,
and finally bringing out the results of his reflec
tion set in order in these "Observations." We
will taste his fruit here and there.
The contents of the volume show at once that
Robinson has a method in the arrangement of
his matter. He starts with "Man's knowledge
of God," follows through the great attributes of
God, to the religious life in its graces and activi
ties; then he takes up the complex subject of
human living and treats it all from the standpoint
of religion, examining such commonplace matters
as "Discretion," "The Use and Abuse of Things,"
"Labour," "Society," "Friendship," "Health,"
"Zeal" and "Marriage." The whole is concluded
with an essay on "Death."
The fact that Robinson approaches his themes
from the standpoint of religion does not mean
that these essays are sections of sermons. Reli
gion, we shall find, is the great fact about John
Robinson and the key to the understanding of

270 JOHN ROBINSON
his character. It is true here. He surveys life
from the standpoint of its religious significance.
The "Essays" are filled with keen observation,
great practical insight, a true discrimination of
values, and, with it all, a breadth, kindliness and
earnestness of temper which must make every
reader of this old book cherish a feeling of genuine
admiration and real love for the man who wrote it.
Let us take a look into the seventh essay,
"Of Religion, and Differences and Disputations
Thereabout. " John Robinson certainly had looked
into "the great volume of men's manners" and
into their lack of manners concerning this theme-
Religion, which is natural to man, Robinson
says, assumes its highest form of truth in the
Christian system, which is given by supernatural
revelation. In this, God has disclosed not only
his nature, as a worthy object of worship, but also
the manner in which that worship is to be carried
on. This is an evidence of Robinson's principles of
Separation, manifested at the very outset of his
essay. There is a constant recurrence of this
fact even in these papers. The writer is a Sepa
ratist. In the application of the principles which
he held so dear, he allowed the largest play for
the individual. He did not think that any cere-

THE ESSAYS 271
mony or ritual was of divine authority, although
God has prescribed the manner of worship as well
as commanded its exercise. For the performance
of worship " the general rules of the Word, with
common-sense and discretion are sufficient."
The standard by which a man's religion is to
be estimated is not his connection with any church.
"A man hath, in truth, so much religion, as he
hath between the Lord and himself in secret, and
no more, what shows soever he makes before
men."1 Robinson's demands from the religious man
are intensely practical. He put the case in this
way: "There are also religious hypocrites not a few,
who, because of a certain zeal which they have
for and in the duties of the first table, repute
themselves highly in -God 's favour, though they
be far from that innocency towards men, spe
cially from that goodness and love indeed, which
the Lord hath inseparably joined with a true reli
gious disposition. Such persons vainly imagine
God to be like unto the most great men, who, if
their followers be obsequious to them in their
persons, and zealous for them in the things, which
more immediately concern their [the geat men's]
honours and profits, do highly esteem of them;
though their dealings with others, specially meaner
1 Page 33.

272 JOHN ROBINSON
men, be far from honest or good. But God is
not partial as men are; nor regards that church
and chamber religion towards him, which is not
accompanied, in the house and streets, with loving-
kindness and mercy and all goodness towards
men."1 This description of the false conception of God
which leads a formalist to think that he can cheat
him is only one of hundreds of similar homely
illustrations of which the "Essays" are full. We
cannot be wrong in concluding that the preacher
who could use these plain illustrations would have
power over a congregation made up of such men
as composed the Leyden church. He speaks in
this same essay of men who put on religion as
they would put on their clothes, simply because
to be destitute of a religion is regarded in some
places as shameful. And thus with plain illus
trations from common life Robinson always en
forces his points.
With another shrewd observation Robinson
now turns to the matter of religious partisanship.
When a man embraces a religion he generally
sets himself very earnestly to advocate and ad
vance the special type of faith which he has
embraced; and he often seeks also to combat all
' Page 34.

RELATION
OF THE STATE OF
T\eligion: and with what Hopes and
Pollieies it hath beene framed, and is maintain
ned in the fever all (fates of thefe xeejterne
pans of the world. j\ <gT £

f

1

5e

LONDON,
Printed few* Simon Waterfon dwel-
ling in 'Paule s Churchyard at the
figne o{ the Crowne.
1605

Facsimile of the Title Page of a Book containing Robinson's Autograph.
By Courtesy of its Owners, the Pilgrim Society, of Plymouth, Massachusetts.

THE ESSAYS 273
other forms than his own, "though oft without
competent knowledge of one or other." Hence
arises the tendency to partisanship and religious
contention. Robinson does not wholly deplore this. The
essentially conservative temper of the man ap
pears in this statement:
"Notwithstanding, we owe this honor to the
particular courses of religion which we have once
embraced, or wherein we have been brought up
and received any good, that we leave it not lightly;
nor further in any particular, than we needs must ;
nor at all in the things which God in it, in true
and distinct consideration, hath blessed to our
spiritual good. To be lightly moved in religion
is childish weakness; but to be stiff without rea
son, manly obstinacy; and better to be a child in
weakness, than a man in perverse obstinateness. " J
This passage lets us see at a glance how deep
must have been the convictions of Robinson be
fore he was induced to go out of the Church of
England. His temper is truly conservative. But
his conservatism is that of the child who loves its
mother's arms and cleaves to her because it loves.
Robinson's counsels in cases of religious con
troversy are consistent with the methods which
we have found him using in all his discussions
"Disputations in religion are. sometimes neces-
' Page 36.

274 JOHN ROBINSON
sary but always dangerous; drawing the best
spirits into the head from the heart, and leaving
it empty of all, or too full of fleshly zeal and pas
sion, if extraordinary care be not taken still to
supply and fill it anew with pious affections to
wards God and loving towards men. "
And so he urges that all who are compelled to
engage in religious controversy remember how
serious the contest is and how fearful the cost of
an error; that they never make out the cause~
of an opponent to be worse than it really is ; that
they never give a sinister interpretation to his
motives; that they be honest and preserve the
approval of a good conscience in their debates.
This gives us a glimpse of a man who was farthest
removed from the narrow ranges of religious par
tisanship. And we understand why Robinson's
own work has so much of rugged honesty, kindly
tolerance^and winning frankness in it.
In this essay there is a bit of local color which
shows us how aptly Robinson was able to choose
an illustration. His own experience had been
pretty closely concerned with the Merchant Ad
venturers, and his people understood all too well
how willing any man was to risk nothing in the
prospect of gaining very much. We can see the
telling force as well as the merry jest, therefore,

THE ESSAYS 27 '5
in a turn like this: Religious disputes are under
taken by many who are not the least prepared for
them, either because they think it is a shame for
them not to show others how much knowledge
and zeal they have in religion, or else "because
they make account in truth that they venture
nothing but words in the voyage, and so can have
no great loss." It is not difficult to see the apt
ness and force of this illustration to the men who
had been wrestling with the practical problems
of the emigration to America and the Merchant
Adventurers. In the following paragraph, also,
Robinson uses an illustration which could not fail
to be appreciated by his people:
"I have known divers that have more lightly
and licentiously changed their religion, and that
in no small points, than a sober man would do the
fashion of his coat; and who, in my conscience,
if it might but have gained or saved them twelve
pence, would have held their former religion still." 1
One of the most frequent criticisms of the Puri
tans, and of the colonists in Massachusetts, is
that, however much they may have been zealous
for religious toleration in England,' when they
were themselves masters they became equally in
tolerant of those who differed from them. One
1 Page 38.

276 JOHN ROBINSON
of the most interesting paragraphs in the essay
that we are now handling is concerned with this
very point:
" Men are for the most part minded for or against
toleration of diversity of religions, according to the
conformity which they themselves hold, or hold
not, with the country or kingdom where they
live. Protestants living in the countries of Papists
commonly plead for toleration of religion; so do
Papists that live where Protestants bear sway:
though few of either, specially of the clergy, as
they are called, would have the other tolerated,
where the world goes on their side. . . . For con
clusion of this matter ... as there is no church-
state and profession so truly Christian and good,
in which too many may not be found carried in
their persons with a spirit plainly antichristian:
so there is hardly any sect so antichristian or
evil otherwise in church profession, in which
there are not divers, truly though weakly led,
with the Spirit of Christ in their persons, and so
true members of his mystical body. With whom
to deal rigorously for some few aberrations of
ignorance or infirmity, were more to please Christ 's
enemy than Christ."1
Back to such teaching as this for its sanction
must be carried that fairer and friendlier attitude
of the Plymouth Colony toward contrary opinion
and practice in religious matters which distin-
1 Page 42.

THE ESSAYS 277
guished them from other sections of Massachusetts.
This spirit had been infused among them by Rob
inson, and they could not forget it in the years
after his death.
We have dwelt longest upon this essay because
it illuminates so clearly the religious temper of its
writer. But this is only one of the many sources
from which clear light is thrown upon his person
ality. The little essay, "Of the Use and Abuse
of Things," is of great value for its thinly-veiled
content of autobiography. Our conception of
Robinson as an austere man would be a natural
inference, no doubt, if we were to judge him by
his controversial or theological works alone. But
he believed that all God's gifts were to be used.
" ' God, ' saith the wise man, ' hath made every
thing beautiful in his time ' : and indeed every
thing is good for something: I mean everything
that God has made." "A man hath that most
and best whereof he hath the lawful use. And
hereupon a follower of a great lord was wont to
say that he had, in effect, as much as his lord,
though he were owner of little or nothing, con
sidering how he had the use of his [lord 's] gardens
and galleries to walk in; heard his music with as
many ears as he did; hunted with him in his parks,
and ate and drank of the same that he did, though
a little after him; and so for the most other delights
which his lord enjoyed."

278 JOHN ROBINSON
But some things are specially liable to abuse.
"And good things are abused commonly either
when they are unmeasurably used ... or by
applying them unaptly." "Neither doth the
abuse of good things so take away or make for
feiture of the use as that the counsel of Lycurgus
is to be followed, who would have the vines cut
down because men were sometimes drunken with
the grapes. Yet may the abuse of a thing be so
common and notorious, and the use so small or
needless, as better want the small use than be in
continual danger of the great abuse of it."1
This particular essay furnishes the soundest
philosophy for the entire matter of temperance
in the use of everything that ministers to physical
pleasure. Robinson shows how the best things
in the world become the very worst when they
are perverted in their right use, and are therefore
to be used with the greatest caution; "otherwise
we shall be liable to the curse of a greater than
Aristippus, who wished a plague upon those wan
tons who, by abusing it, had defamed a certain
sweet ointment wherein he took delight." "All
evil stands in the abuse of the good," Robinson
believed. The greatest abuse to which things are
subjected is in their intemperate use, "as it is
said of wine, that the first cup quenches thirst,
' Page 121.

THE ESSAYS 279
the second produces cheerfulness, the third, drunk
enness, and the fourth, madness." The best
things in the world "we must not therefore super-
stitiously disavow, or cease to account the best,
as they are ; but we must thereby be warned to use
them the more warily, that we may enjoy their
full goodness and not prejudice them by abuse."
It is quite common to regard the Puritan as a
person who relegated all the brightest and most
cheerful influences in his environment to the class
of things forbidden. The austerity, renunciation
and limited enjoyments of these men have been
defined as their most pronounced characteristics.
Here, however, are breadth and joyousness of
view and deep insight into the true meaning of
life, which forbid classifying their author with the
Puritan as he is commonly considered. The
Essays lead us a step farther than this. They
serve to correct the popular idea of the Puritan.
Robinson was not a startling exception among
the Puritans and the Separatists. These were
men of broader sympathies and happier temper
than they are generally regarded. Robinson's
Essays set him securely among the men of good
cheer, intense humanity, keen appreciation of the
good things of this earthly life ; he is modern to the
core and also Puritan to the core. It is a libel to

280 JOHN ROBINSON
brand Puritanism as gloomy and cold. The essays
of John Robinson repudiate that notion.
Robinson drew his observations from two
sources. The first and deepest of these is divine.
God, who has spoken through the sacred Scrip
tures, is the source of all wisdom, and commands
men to lay their ear close to his mouth that they
may hear him speak. The second source of wis
dom is man himself. And neither source is per
fect without the other, although the knowledge
of God must be accorded first place in order of
importance. A man who claims to be a servant
of God but does not know him is like a man who
pretends to be the servant of some nobleman
whom he never has seen, or within whose gates he
never has entered.
Robinson's thinking began and rounded itself
out in the great fact of God. He did not try to
define God. He realized that the infinite never
could be comprehended by man, even if there were
any medium through which it could be revealed.
To Robinson, God was utterly past finding out,
and he was dazzled by the infinite splendor more
than the eye is dazzled when it attempts to gaze
upon the sun at midday. But, although he
could not, by searching, find God out, he found
it quite possible and his happy privilege to let his

THE ESSAYS 281
soul loose in the unspeakable glory, and there,
without another mood to spoil its rapture, it arose
and sang. His heart was ravished with love of
the Majesty divine, especially as he sought and
found it unveiled in Jesus Christ. The fulness of
everlasting joy he expected to find in the infinite
Father and his fellowship.
So Robinson's heart glowed with a joy in the
sense of God's being and love and fatherly care,
which makes him one with all mystic lovers of
the invisible Father. The same spiritual passion
burns in the heart of the Separatist as leaped into
flame in the breast of St. Francis when he stretched
out his hands toward the ineffable glory of the
seraph to receive the impress of the stigmata.
The Christian world, however sadly rent with
schism, is yet one in the impulse of its devotion
and the passion of its love.
There is something deeply beautiful in the
glimpse which we get into the heart of Robinson
through his essay, "Of God's Love." He is
like Paul in his spiritual exultation. He fairly
shouts it forth. "He whom God loves, though
he know it not, is a happy man: he that knows
it knows himself to be happy." Robinson re
peats the experience of Paul from the record in
the eighth chapter of the letter to the Romans;

282 JOHN ROBINSON
and we see the Leyden pastor and the great apos
tle to the Gentiles sharing the same rich experi
ence. Nothing — nor death, nor principalities, nor
powers — could separate him from the love of God
in Christ Jesus. Not even the tearfulness of sin
clouded this splendid experience.
Robinson makes God's severity with sin the
inevitable outcome of divine love. For God must
love that which is good; and that which is the
highest good is God himself; therefore God must
love himself supremely, and then all good things
to which he has communicated his own goodness.
Anything, therefore, which violates his holiness
must come under his severest censure, because it
is an offense against the love which he has for
goodness. Although he loves all the works of his
hand, when man, by his sin, offends that infinite
love of the good, it is necessary that man should
become miserable rather than that God should
forget his own honor and glory.
Robinson does not dwell in this realm of sterner
reflection long. He comes back quickly to the
gracious love of which he is as sure as he is cer
tain of the sun, although he does not climb into
the heavens to see it shine. The greatest witness
of the love of God to men is the fact that he does
turn them from sin unto himself. Into this essay

THE ESSAYS 283
one might insert, without doing violence to its
lofty tone, the words of Whittier, from his poem,
"The Eternal Goodness":
"And so beside the Silent Sea
I wait the muffled oar ;
No harm from Him eaif come to me
On ocean or on shore.
"I know not where His islands lift
Their f ronded palms in air ;
I only know I cannot drift
Beyond His love and care."
The simplicity of Ptobinson's trust in God is
evident from the manner in which he regards
dependence upon the divine promises. We have
a short essay, "Of God's Promises," in which he
defines his relation to the promises of the Father.
Here, as in many another place in his writings,
Robinson lets a sentence escape him which reveals
to us the stress of exile and poverty in which
he was obliged to spend his days. The Lord, he
says, "provides very graciously for his poor serv
ants, who are ofttimes brought into that dis
tressed state both outward and inward as they
have very little else save the promises of God
wherewith to comfort themselves." But these
promises Robinson tested and found true, even
in the respect to material things.

284 JOHN ROBINSON
"I must therefore thus conclude with myself
touching those matters — seeing 'God hath prom
ised all good things to them that love him' (Psa.
xxxiv : 9) : if this or that bodily good thing, good
in itself, be indeed for my good, I shall receive-it
from him in due time: and if I receive it not,
it is a real testimony from him that indeed it is
not good for me, how much soever I desire it."
This reverent trust in the goodness of God
marks Robinson as one of those "literal Chris
tians," who dare to follow their Master even into
the ranges of a perfect filial confidence. It takes
a great soul to rise to the level of such practice.
There are certain moods which none but a Chris
tian can understand. When St. Paul discloses his
very heart in such words as " I am crucified with
Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ
liveth in me," he puts himself into the class of
those whom only a man of similar experience can
appreciate. The experience may be made the
subject of analytical investigation by others, but
it cannot be understood except by a mystic. St.
Francis of Assisi, "rapt in God," is an enigma
to one who has never known anything of a trans
port as real and divine as his. John Robinson,
practical and sagacious pastor and friend, opens
his heart in this little essay so deeply that we see
his kinship of soul with men of the type of Paul

THE ESSAYS 285
and Francis. To those who know the experience,
he becomes a more real person by this glimpse
into inner chambers.
There is hardly a more significant or interesting
section of all Robinson's writings, for the light
that it throws upon the character of the man, than
the short essay, "Of Created Goodness;"1 for
it shows by sharpest contrast the speculative
reasoner and the man of helpful service. Here
are the two sides of Robinson's character set
over against each other in a few pages, the
theologian and the practical philanthropist.
Robinson cannot approach the matter of doing
good, the "showing of a spring of water to him
that is thirsty," or the gift of "even one loaf,
yea a shive to him that is hungry," — he cannot
come to the point of giving good, practical coun
sel about these things except through the avenue
of a speculative discussion of the relation of all
human or "created" goodness to the benevo
lence of God. God is the source of all goodness,
and everything that is done to us that is good is
only a blessing of God reached to us by the hand
of a brother.
But this background of divine sovereignty and
the attempt to relate the beneficent action of the
1 Page 17-23.

286 JOHN ROBINSON
human will to it, characteristic as it is of Robin
son's thought, yields very soon to a discourse
on the manner in which good ought to be done,
which is conducted so plainly and with such wise
appreciation of the task of doing good, that we
summarize and quote the points as follows :
"First, We must do things in obedience to
Gods commandments, and in honour of his name
and gospel; and must ever have that end in our
eye, as archers have their mark.
"Secondly, That we do it at all times, as we
have opportunity. . . . We must beware of that
agueish goodness, which comes by fits only and
when men are pleased: for so, they say, the devil
is good. "Thirdly, We must do good readily. . . He
that giveth, or doth other good, readily, giveth
twice: he scarce once, or at all, that doth it
slackly: he rather, in truth, suffers a good turn
to be drawn from him that doeth it. Living
springs send out streams of water : dead pits must
have all that they afford drawn out with buckets.
"Fourthly, According to our ability; knowing,
that as our receivings are from God, greater or
less, so much our accounts be for doing good. . . .
"Fifthly, We must have respect to men's pres
ent wants; and not only consider what we can
best spare but withal what they stand most need
of. . . .

THE ESSAYS 287
"Sixthly, We must do good to all (Gal. vi. 10),
knowing, that wheresoever a man is, there is a
place for a good turn: but, more specially, to
some according to the singular bond, natural,
civil, or religious, wherewith God hath tied us
together. . . .
"Lastly, A good man, how gracious soever
and ready to do good, 'guideth his affairs with
discretion' (Psa. cxii. 5), not sowing his seed in
barren ground, by bestowing favours without
difference; for that is rather to throw away than
to bestow a benefit."
The good sense and the keen insight of these
counsels are at once evident. There is the con
ciseness of Poor Richard in them; there is the
practical experience of the Christian pastor behind
them; and before the essay closes, we are per
mitted to see the beating of that pastor's heart in
a paragraph which rings true to the experiences
of the Christian ministry to-day, as much as it
did to the conditions of the Separatist church in
Leyden during the first quarter of the seventeenth
century. "When I consider what good the rich and
mighty otherwise in the world might easily do if
they had hearts answerable; and how little they
do for the most part; it seems horrible unthank-
fulness and iniquity in them, and matter of indig
nation against them: but then, on the other side,

288 JOHN ROBINSON
when I consider how little good I myself do, in
my meanness, and others my like, to that which
I should, and might do, if I did my utmost; I
find reason to be most angry with myself and
mine own unprofitableness, and to be glad and
thankful that so much good is done by the other
as is."
Thus the pastor's experience makes him ten
der, wise and fraternal, where the struggles of the
theologian served to do little more than to stir
the mist without showing the way. Years later
Cotton Mather, the theologian, wrote his "Essays
to do Good." Benjamin Franklin, who could
have had little sympathy with Mather's theology,
found it in his heart to write concerning the influ
ence of the slight volume upon him:
" If I have been, as you seem to think, a useful
citizen, the public owes all the advantage of it to
that book."1
We are likely to forget Mather's "Essays" and
their influence upon Franklin in the emphasis
which we lay upon the theological work of their
writer. The parallel is not without interest.
These few pages in the midst of the many filled
with controversies in doctrine and polity may
have found, and doubtless did find, their Franklin
'A. P. Marvin, " The Life and Times of Cotton Mather," p. 362.

THE ESSAYS 289
somewhere. At least the pages glow to-day with
counsel that is both kindly and wise.
There are indications everywhere in the Essays
of Robinson's tendency to take large views of life
and to consider all sides of a question. An in
stance of this catholic judgment is the rule he lays
down according to which the value of a man's
life and work is to be estimated. He says:
"We are not, therefore, to measure a person's
state by some one or few acts, done, as it were,
by the way, and upon instance of some strong
temptation, but according to the tenor and course
of his life. Else what wise man should not be a
fool also? Or what fool should not be a wise
man?" It was not a common canon of judgment in
times of intense controversy and sharp use of per
sonal judgment; but Robinson held firmly to this
principle, that no man is wholly good and no man
wholly bad, so far as his actions make it possible
to judge of his character. We must not forget
this fact whenever we consider the severities of
Robinson's doctrine of original sin and the bond
age of the spirit to evil.
In the essay " Of Equability, and Perseverance
in Well-doing"1 Robinson pleads for the reason-
1 Pages 24-31 .

290 JOHN ROBINSON
ableness of a judicious, conservative attitude
toward all religious questions. He is a true
disciple of the middle way, whenever that does
not involve the sacrifice of any principle. The
instance of Eli is used by Robinson to illustrate
his thought as follows :
" It is dangerous in courses of religion and god
liness to fall forward by errors, preposterous zeal,
or other misguidance: yet not so much so as to
fall backward by an unfaithful heart. The for
mer may break his face thereby, and lose his com
fort in a great measure both with God and men:
but the latter is in danger utterly to break the
neck of his conscience, as old Eli brake his neck
bodily by falling backward from his seat and died.
Are there not many Eli's in all ages?"
The progress of the soul, Robinson taught, can
be secured only by resolute struggle. The sins
and the dispositions toward evil which are bound
up with our constitution make it necessary for us
to fight if we are to gain ground. As he puts it in
homely phrase, "our way to heaven is up a hill,
and we drag a cart-load of our corruptions after
us; which, except we keep going, will pull us back
ward ere we be aware."1
Robinson's sense of the authority of the Scrip
tures was vivid and compelling. He'^wrote con
cerning them as follows:
1 Page 28.

THE ESSAYS 291
"The Scriptures are not only authentic in
themselves, as having the Spirit of God for the
author both of matter and manner and writing
(2 Pet. i. 21) ; but do also, as they say, carry their
authority in their mouths, binding both to cre
dence and obedience all whomsoever unto whom
they come and by what means soever."
His doctrine of inspiration, so far as he formu
lates it in the Essays, is not so limited as the
strictest interpretation of the foregoing might lead
us to believe. He says:
"Neither all things which the prophets of God
wrote were written by Divine inspiration, but some
of them humanly, as their human affairs, common
to them with other men, required: neither was
all wherein they were divinely inspired brought
into the public treasury of the church or made
part of the canonical Scriptures which we call the
Bible; no more than all which they spake was
spoken by the Spirit; or all which they spake by
the Spirit written (John xx. 30, 31; xxi. 25) :x but
only so much as the Lord in wisdom and mercy
thought requisite to guide the church in faith and
obedience to the world's end; so as the Scriptures
should neither be defective through brevity, nor
burthensome by too great largeness and prolixity. "
1 "And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his dis
ciples, which are not written in this book; but these are written, that ye
might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God ; and that believing
ye might have life through his name. "
"And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if
they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself
could not contain the books that should be written. "

292 JOHN ROBINSON
We find ourselves brought constantly in contact
with Robinson's spiritual temper in these Essays.
One of the hardships which his sensitive spirit
was compelled to endure was the reproach of a
schismatic from the body of true Christians which
he seemed doomed to bear. This was a trial of
no slight character to him. We can almost hear
him appeal from the judgments of men, which
were at one against him in this regard, to the
just judgment of God, before whom his own soul
said he stood innocent, in a paragraph from the
essay "Of Heresy and Schism."1
"And if, only an uncharitable heart make an
uncharitable person before God, and a proud
heart, a proud person; then he, who upon due
examination and certain knowledge of his heart,
finds and feels the same truly disposed to union
with all Christians, so far as possibly he can see it
lawful; though, through error or frailty, he may
step aside into some by-path, that way; yet, hath
that person a supersedeas from the Lord in his
bosom, securing him from being attached for a
schismatical person and so found in the court of
heaven ; what blame soever he may bear from men
upon earth, or correction from God, for his fail
ing, upon infirmity, therein."
Here and there the Essays drag heavily. The
' Page 72.

THE ESSAYS 293
subjects are commonplace at times and the treat
ment of, them conventional and prosaic. Now
and then, however, Robinson throws a tremendous
dash of vitality into a theme, and it is lifted at
once from the low levels of academic treatment
by the touch of life. The man who has suffered
and fought speaks now and then, and scarcely
ever with more splendid vitality of conviction than
in the essay, "Of Truth and Falsehood."1 It
is a champion who says:
"But our Lord Christ called himself truth, not
custom: neither is falsehood, error or heresy con
vinced by novelty, but by truth. This truth is
always the same whilst the God of truth is in
heaven, what entertainment soever it find with
men, upon earth : it is always praiseworthy, though
no man praise it; and hath no reason, or just cause
to be ashamed, though it often goes with a scratched
face. They that fight against it are like the floods
beating upon the strong rocks, which are so much
the more miserably dashed in pieces, by how much
they are the more violently carried. Though fire
and sword assault it, yet will it not be killed,
or die : and though by violence it be buried quick,
yet will it rise again; and if not before, yet when
all flesh shall rise again; and when truth, which
was first, and before falsehood and error, shall be
last, and abide for ever."
' Pages 72-76.

294 JOHN ROBINSON
There beats through such words as these the
pulse of a brave and honest man, who conceives
of his life as a gift to a cause. And back of all
the rugged honesty of his controversies, which we
have seen everywhere in evidence, lies the prin
ciple which he formulates in these words :
" He that hath but a right philosophical spirit,
and is but morally honest, would rather suffer
many deaths than call a pin, a point, or speak
the least thing against his understanding or per
suasion, ".r Ey
This is one reason why the writings of Robinson
stand so far above the mass of the surviving liter
ature of the Separation. There is such honesty of
conviction in them; such sensitiveness to the high
claims of the truth abounds; such perfect willing
ness to repudiate old grounds when new positions
become clear is here, that we are ready to give
enthusiastic praise to John Robinson, the cham
pion of the truth.
Robinson was a truth seeker before he was a
truth defender. He believed in the effort of the
reason to apprehend the truth. In an essay
" Of Knowledge and Ignorance, " he says :
"Papists call ignorance the mother of devotion;
and so make reckoning that if they, the multi
tude especially, be ignorant enough, they are de-

THE ESSAYS 295
vout enough. But the philosopher, though a
heathen, who thought all sin to come of ignorance,
shot nearer the mark than those left-handed
Christians."1 Another essay, "Of Society and Friendship,"
has so much of the modern social sense in it, and
contains so strong a protest against the whole
effort to attain holiness through isolation, that it
might well come from the pen of a writer to-day.
How near the courses of modern thinking this
proposition runs:
"God hath made man a sociable creature; and
hath not only ordained several societies, in which
persons are to unite themselves for their mutual
welfare; but withal so dispensed his blessings as
that no man is so barren but hath something
wherewith to profit others; nor any so furnished
but that he stands [in] need of others to supply
his wants."
Here, certainly, is a keen appreciation of the
unity of the race, the mutual dependence of its
members, and the necessity of society to the per
fection of the individual.
In its bearing upon the Christian life, Robinson
is no less clear concerning the validity of the prin
ciple :
1 Page 79.

296 JOHN ROBINSON
"As God hath established fellowships and com
munities of men to procure their mutual good,
and to fence them the better, on every side, against
evil; so sin and wickedness being the greatest and
only absolute evil, Christians are most bound
by virtue of their association, to help and assist,
within the bounds of the callings in which God
hath set them, their brethren and associates against
it." The duty of the Christian to serve society is
therefore taught with the greatest force and clear
ness by Robinson, as over against any tendency
to "hide in holes" from one's fellow men, "as
melancholic monks do."
On every page of this essay Robinson stands
revealed to us as a loyal and tender friend. He
bears witness to the joy he found in the fellow
ship of kindred spirits:
" To him that knows the use of true friendship,
no earthly thing is more delightful than the sweet
society of wise and honest friends, whether for
recreation after study or labor; or communication
in a prosperous state ; or comfort in an afflicted. "
He warns against letting the fact of an abuse
of confidence in a single instance lead to a per
manent distrust of all men; he urges the wisdom
of sharing our joys with our friends rather than
always giving them a knowledge of our sorrows.

THE ESSAYS 297
He gives us such sententious bits of truth as this:
"Wealth maketh many friends, but poverty
trieth them."
He lets us see again that temper and tendency
of his own spirit which we have found impelling
him toward a larger communion with his Christian
brethren :
"Lastly, when we are necessarily pressed [to
break rather than untwine the cord of a former
friendship] let us rather do it with sorrow than
anger; and withal, have in us a disposition to re-
assume our old course of kindness, if there appear
cause afterwards; as the storks, when the winter
is over, do affect their former nests. "
Robinson lays down a rule equally tolerant and
gracious in the essay, " Of Suspicion," in which
he says :
"Howsoever things fall out, it is best to keep
our bias always on the right side; and to incline
still to a better, rather than to a worse opinion of
men than they deserve."1
Such examples of true insight as these are scat
tered all through the Essays:
" It is the first duty of a man to inform his con
science aright; and then to follow the direction
that it gives."2
1 Page 181.
2 Page 195.

298 JOHN ROBINSON
"True zeal must be for God, and from God, and
according to God : and having God both for begin
ning and end and rule of direction, it cannot but
itself be good and godly."1
Let us turn for a moment to another essay, of
only three printed pages, on " Health and Physic. "
It shows us a side of Robinson's character that
we never would surmise from the other writings
which we have already examined. Here are bits
of keen observation, neat turns of thought and
phrase, and a merry mood blended with an ear
nest, serious spirit. Good health he calls "this
most sweet sauce of all other goods," and the best
way to preserve it is by a temperate life, begun
early and continued steadfastly. The one point
at which Robinson has wondered most is the
unreasonable choice of physicians which persons
make when they are in need of them. The per
verse tendency to consult quacks was prevalent
then as now, if this observation by Robinson is
true: "For though in all other courses men seek for
[the counsel of] such as are most skilful; yet in
this they are not only more ready to believe any
that professeth himself a physician, than of any
other faculty [i. e. profession]; but also choose
rather to trust their bodies and lives in the hands
1 Page 205.

THE ESSAYS 299
of ignorant empirics, men or women, than of the
most expert and learned physicians that are. "
Robinson proceeds to speculate upon the grounds
of this observed fact, and, among other reasons to
account for it, finds that the large fees charged
by physicians of high standing tend to induce
many to seek inexperienced quacks whose charges
are less. And this gives Robinson the opportu
nity to offer this word of counsel to the regular
physicians :
" If they would descend to that rule of equity in
other cases, a pennyworth for a penny, [they]
would find that, lighter gains coming thicker,
would make heavier purses."
In the concluding paragraph of the essay, Rob
inson indulges in a piece of ancient wit at the
expense of physicians, although he does not end
it until he has turned, in his usually serious way,
to point a moral. He says :
" Physicians, saith one, and truly, have this ad
vantage over them of other professions, that the
sun beholds their cures, and the earth covers their
failings. They that die under their hands, or by
their default, are past complaining of them: they
that recover and survive, though sometimes by
the benefit of nature alone, under God's provi
dence, will repute and report them the means of
their recovery. Which consideration makes not

300 JOHN ROBINSON
the honest and conscionable the more secure, but
the more careful of their account to be given to
God, from whose eyes nothing is hid." 1
It is almost two hundred and fifty years since
a new edition of this single volume has been put
out. Even in the reprint among the author's col
lected works the Essays are seldom read. Per
haps it is useless to hope that they will ever claim
attention. They are very vital papers, however.
A few of them are as timely now as they were in
the first quarter of the seventeenth century. Their
author was a man of wide acquaintance with clas
sical literature; he saw clearly and deeply into
life; he was the master at times of a clear and
forceful style. The Essays are his most impor
tant literary work.
1 Page 139.

XIV
THE LAST YEARS IN LEYDEN

CHAPTER XIV
THE LAST YEARS IN LEYDEN
John Robinson turned back to Leyden from
Delfshaven for a busy life of less than five years.
. It was a time of divided interests. He was still
pastor of the church of the exiles; he was still pas
tor of the church of the remnant. His whole wish
was to remain with those who needed him most,
the aged and the weak in Leyden, until, by the
gradual transfer of the Leyden majority his duty
should lie in the New World and he might follow
to resume it there. He deplored their lack of a
preacher and said, in a letter to John Carver, that
he should make this fact a spur to a reunion with
them at the earliest possible moment.
The company of emigrants to America did not
consist entirely of members of Robinson's con
gregation in Leyden. There were many who joined
them in England. The Leyden pastor, however,
regarded himself as the pastor of the entire com
pany, for he sent them a letter in that capacity
which was read to them before they sailed from
Southampton. Bradford thought that the letter
303

304 JOHN ROBINSON
was sufficiently important to warrant its insertion
in his story, "Of Plimoth Plantation." 1 The let
ter shows how much Robinson longed to be with
the exiles in their undertaking. He says :
" Loving Christian Friends, I do heartily and in
the Lord salute you all, as being they with whom
I am present , in my best affection, and most ear
nest longings after you, though I be constrained
for a while to be bodily absent from you. I say
constrained God knowing how willingly, and much
rather than otherwise, I would have borne my part
with you in this first brunt, were I not by strong
necessity held back for the present. Make account
of me in the mean while, as of a man divided in
myself with great pain, and as (natural bonds set
aside) having my better part with you."
This is characteristic of Robinson. His heroism
in the return to Leyden, to take up his work again
with the aged and feebler remnant as pastor and
leader in practical enterprises, was greater than it
would have been had he sailed in the Mayflower.
The concluding paragraphs of the Southampton
letter are very significant in their bearing upon
the civil life of the exiles. One of these is as
follows :
" Lastly, whereas you are become a body politic,
using amongst yourselves civil government, and
1 Pages 78-82.

LAST YEARS IN LEYDEN 305
are not furnished with any persons of special emi-
nency above the rest, to be chosen by you into
office of government, let your wisdom and godli
ness appear, not only in choosing such persons as
do entirely love and will promote the common
good, but also in yielding unto them all due honor
and obedience in their lawful administrations;
not beholding in them the ordinariness [i. e. com-
monplaceness or familiarity] of their persons, but
God's ordinance for your good, not being like the
foolish multitude who more honor the gay coat,
than either the virtuous mind of the man or [the]
glorious ordinance of the Lord. But you know
better things, and that the image of the Lord's
power and authority which the magistrate beareth
is honorable, in how mean [commonplace] persons
soever. And this duty you both may the more
willingly and ought the more conscionably [i. e.
conscientiously] to perform, because you are at
least for the present to have only them for your
ordinary governors, which [whom] yourselves
shall make choice of for that work."
It is at once evident from this letter that E,obin-
son anticipated the formation of the exiles into
a "civili body politick" on precisely those lines
which were laid down in the compact which was
signed in the cabin of the Mayflower at Province-
town on November 11, or, according to our
method of reckoning, November 21, 1620. He
wrote his words of counsel to them for the pur-

306 JOHN ROBINSON
pose of strengthening what he must have himself
taught them in Leyden. It is very wholesome
counsel. It shows the true democracy which he
safeguarded by insistence upon the divine char
acter of the power given to elected officers. This
extract would serve a good purpose if read to-day
at the beginning of every New England town
meeting. The details of Robinson's relation to the Mer
chant Adventurers as that bore on the possibility
of his removal to Plymouth are somewhat obscure.
But the general outlines of the matter are quite
clear. These points are plain:
First, it was the intention of the Leyden church
that the removal of the stronger and younger
members should be preparatory to the final trans
fer of the entire membership, together with the
pastor, who had remained behind. This inten
tion was shared by the people and Robinson
alike. Second, it was for the highest spiritual welfare
of the church that they should be united as quickly
as possible, in order that the counsel and pastoral
care of Robinson might be enjoyed by the church,
and also that they might have the benefit of his
strong practical wisdom.
But there was a division of interests. As the

LAST YEARS IN LEYDEN 307
Leyden-Plymouth church was the first Congre
gational church to illustrate the Separatist ideal
clearly and persistently, so the Merchant Adven
turers and business managers of the Pilgrim move
ment were the prototype of the second organization,
which still continues in many churches of this
order, the ecclesiastical society. They were the
persons to provide the money for the support
of the spiritual activities of the church, and their
paramount interest was not spiritual, but finan
cial and commercial. There were several consid
erations which weighed with them to induce
them to oppose the bringing over of the Leyden
remnant and the pastor. This remnant was
composed of the older and weaker members of
the church; in the development of the plans at
Plymouth there was need of the strongest only.
Then, too, the idea of the Separation was un
welcome to the men who had ventured money
in the enterprise. However reasonable and
catholic Robinson's views of the Separation
might be, he was nevertheless one of its most
pronounced defenders, and to men anxious chiefly
for the success of a financial venture this was
generally unwelcome and often repugnant.
It must be remembered that the settlement of
Plymouth had been made under no specific grant

308 JOHN ROBINSON
of freedom in religion. It was clearly enough
the policy, not only of the officers of the Church
of England, from whom such action was to be
expected, but also of the crown, to secure the con
trol of New England for episcopacy. Therefore;
although the permission to remove and settle was
granted with readiness, there was great official
unwillingness to allow any radical Puritan or
avowed Separatist minister to go to Plymouth.
These last years in Leyden were filled with the
disappointments of vain attempts on Robinson's
part to join his friends in Plymouth. A letter
from Thomas Blossom, dated December 15, 1625,
shows how keen the pastor's desire to go was.
Blossom writes to the brethren at Plymouth:
" Alas ! you wTould fain have had him with you,
and he would as fain have come to you; many let
ters and much speech hath been about his com
ing to you, but never any solid course proposed
for his going; if the course propounded the last
year had appeared to have been certain, he would
have gone with two or three families. I know no
man amongst us knew his mind better than I did,
about those things; he was loath to leave the
ch., yet I know also, that he would have accepted
the worst conditions wh. in the largest extent of a
good conscience could be taken, to have come to
you." 1
' See Mass. Hist. Soe. Coll., Ser. 1, Vol. 3, p. 41. Year 1794.

LAST YEARS IN LEYDEN 309
Robinson himself wrote to Carver, " Assure your
self that my heart is with you, and that I will
not foreslow my bodily coming at the first op
portunity." x By the close of the year 1623
Robinson had become aware of the fact that the
possibility of being able to go to America was very
slight. He wrote to Brewster that he was obliged
to call his transportation to America "desired,
rather than hoped for." He saw that the only
possible means of realizing the plan was that money
should be sent from Plymouth for the purpose ; but,
even if that were accomplished, he clearly fore
saw that the Adventurers would invent a reason
to keep him in Holland. With his usual compre
hensive clearness he summed up the matter in
this way:
"We must dispose the adventurers into three
parts ; and of them some five or six (as I conceive)
are absolutely bent for us above others. 2 Other
five or six are our bitter, professed adversaries.
The rest, being the body, I conceive to be honestly
minded, and lovingly also toward us; yet such
as have others, namely, the forward preachers,
[i. e. the pronounced Puritans who did not go to
1 "Of Plimoth Plantation, "p. 78.
2 Among these was Sherley , who incurred the ill-will of the other adven
turers by favoring the removal. He wrote to Plymouth in 1627, "The
sole cause why the greater part of the adventurers malign me was that I
would not side with them against you and the coming over of the Ley
den people." See "New England's Memorial," p. 82, note.

310 JOHN ROBINSON
the extreme of Separation], nearer unto them
than us, and whose course [cause], so far as there
is any difference, they would advance rather
than ours."
The majority, therefore, was against the removal
of the section of the church still remaining in Ley
den. So long as the smaller number continued
in Holland, Robinson was in duty bound to stay
with them. It is very likely that the mere cost
of transferring himself and his family might have
been borne out of his own resources ; but the ques
tion of his duty was supreme, and he could not
leave Leyden so long as he was needed as pastor
of the weaker remnant. He saw clearly that a
part of the opposition to his removal came from
Puritan preachers themselves, who had an eye on
the colony at Plymouth and did not wish their
possible market to be marred by Robinson's
presence there. He knew that there were men
among the Adventurers who would maliciously
stop him if he once started for America. There
is no intense bitterness in Robinson's letter over
this condition; it is profound sorrow, rather,
coupled with a prayer for patience, that breathes
through his words.
The removal of the number who went to Ply
mouth necessarily lightened the load of Robin-

LAST YEARS IN LEYDEN 311
son's cares, and gave him more time for literary
and controversial work. He was in his prime,
between forty-five and fifty years of age. His
literary work was very significant during these
five years. The subject-matter of these books
has been considered elsewhere; it is interesting
to notice the array of titles. In 1624 were pub
lished his "Defense of the Doctrine Propounded
by the Synod at Dort" and "An Appeal on
Truth's Behalf (concerning some Differences in
the Church at Amsterdam) ." In 1625 appeared the
first edition of the "Essays" and the edition
in English of the "Apology. " The latter appeared
again in 1644 with the addition of " An Appendix
to M. Perkins, his six Principles of Christian Reli
gion, " which was very probably prepared after
1620. He also wrote " A Treatise of the Law
fulness of Hearing of the Ministers in the Church
of England," during the very last years of his life
in Leyden. Hence there have remained some
precious results from this trying experience of
five years' hope deferred. If there had been no
opposition ter his removal to America, Robinson
might have become so absorbed in the work of
the Plymouth church that the "Essays" never
would have been written, and the gracious treatise
in behalf of wider fellowship never prepared.

312 JOHN ROBINSON
Sorrows came to Robinson's home during these
five years. On February 7, 1621, there was a
burial in St. Peter's Church. It was a child
of John and Bridget Robinson, whose name we
do not know. The records of October 15, in the
same year, state that they still had six children,
the oldest of whom bore the names of their
parents, John and Bridget. Isaac and James,
Mercy and Fear, were the others. These were
characteristic names. In March, 1623, the family
circle was broken again, although we do not know
the name of this child whose body also was in
terred in St. Peter's Church. It is to be regretted
that no record has been discovered thus far which
enables us to know more of the details of Robin
son's home life. Those who knew him in his home
have told us nothing, and no Boswell lived to pre
serve the commonplace sayings and deeds of the
Leyden pastor.
The first letter which Governor Bradford has
preserved in his Letter Book announcing the
death of Robinson, was from Roger White, Mrs.
Robinson's brother, and bears the date "Leyden,
April 28, Anno 1625." It was addressed to Brad
ford, and the paragraph in reference to Robinson 's
death is as follows:
"These [letters] therefore are to give you to

LAST YEARS IN LEYDEN 313
understand, that it hath pleased the Lord to take
out of this veil of tears your and our loving
and faithful pastor, and my dear brother, Mr.
John Robinson, who was sick some eight days,
beginning first to be sick on a Saturday morning,
yet the next day, being the Lord's day, he taught
us twice, and the week after grew every day
weaker than other, yet felt no pain but weakness,
all the time of his sickness: the physic he took
wrought kindly, in man's judgment, yet he grew
every day weaker than other, feeling little or
no pain, yet sensible, till the very last. Who fell
sick the twenty-second of February, and departed
this life the first of March. He had a continual
inward ague, which brought the [flux] but I thank
the Lord, was free of the plague, so that all his
friends could come freely to him. And if either
prayers, tears, or means would have saved his life,
he had not gone hence. But he having faithfully
finished his course, and performed his work, which
the Lord had appointed him here to perform; he
now rests with the Lord, in eternal happiness.
We wanting him and all church Governours, not
having one at present that is a governing officer
among us." 1
White speaks also of the great weakness of the
Leyden remnant of the church since Robinson's
death, and their yearning to be with the brethren
in America.
* Mass. Hist. Soe. Coll., Vol. 3, 1794, p. 40.

314 JOHN ROBINSON
The second letter was from Thomas Blossom
to Bradford and Brewster, and bore the date
"Leyden, December 15, Anno 1625."
He speaks of the way in which the Lord has
seemed to cross the success of those means which
had been used to bring the separated sections of
the church together, and especially that one,
"which would have been so comfortable unto us
in that course, both for wisdom of counsel as also
for our singular help in our course of godliness;
whom the Lord (as it were) took away even as
fruit falleth before it was ripe; when neither
length of days, nor infirmity of body did seem to
call for his end. The Lord even then took him
away, as it were in his anger ; whom if tears would
have held, he had remained to this day. The loss
of his ministry was very great unto me, for I ever
counted myself happy in the enjoyment of it,
notwithstanding all the crosses and losses, other
wise I sustained. Yet indeed the manner of his
taking away hath more troubled me, as fearing
the Lord's anger in it, that, as I said, in the ordi
nary course of things, might still have remained,
as also, the singular service he might have yet.
done in the church of God. Alas! dear friends,
our state and cause in religion by his death being
wholly destitute of any that may defend our cause
as it should against our adversaries."1
The news of their pastor's death struck the
1 Mass. Hist. Soo. Coll., Vol. 3, 1794, p. 41.

LAST YEARS IN LEYDEN 315
church in Plymouth with the deepest sorrow.
They thought how their enemies had plotted
against the pastor's coming to them, and how
"the Lord had appointed him a better place."
They heard of the death of King James of Eng
land and of Prince Maurice, who, White wrote,
"both departed this life since my brother Robin
son." Bradford copied the letter into his His
tory, adding, "Death makes no difference." So
the close of the reign of King James came at about
the time Robinson's earthly ministry ended, as
it had begun about the year in which Robinson
first decided for the Separation. The man on
the throne in England and the man fighting for
freedom in Scrooby and Holland lived each his
own life; it is for the Maker of all men to say which
one was the better, braver and more helpful.
At this point we come face to face with one of
the vexed questions in the story of Robinson's
life. Writing concerning the character of the pas
tor, Winslow, in his "Brief Narration" says:
"When God took him away from them and us
by death, the University and ministers of the city
accompanied him to his grave with all their accus
tomed solemnities, bewailing the great loss that
not only that particular church had whereof he
was pastor, but some of the chief of them sadly
affirmed that all the churches of Christ sustained

316 JOHN ROBINSON
a loss by the death of that worthy instrument of
the Gospel."1
This report comes from Winslow, who was not in
Leyden in 1625, and must, therefore, have learned
the details concerning the honor paid to Robin
son by ministers and members of the University
through reports from the Leyden brethren.
We also must bear in mind that there is no
mention of this fact in the letters which either
White or Blossom wrote as to Robinson's death,
at least so far as these have been preserved for
us. But those letters do not refer to the funeral
in any way. When, therefore, Sumner uses this
silence of the letters as an argument for the un
trustworthy character of the statement concern
ing the public funeral,2 he is giving quite too
much weight to those documents. He says that
members of Robinson's congregation wrote letters
to their former companions in Plymouth in which
they "give minute particulars of his [Robinson's]
death." But the letters of Blossom and White
(and Sumner refers to no others) are provokingly
indefinite concerning Robinson's death, and they
have no mention whatever of the time, place or
manner of his burial. /
1 See Young, "Chronicles," p. 392.
2 See Sumner's "Memoirs," p. 54.

LAST YEARS IN LEYDEN 317
A second argument used by Sumner to render
the evidence of Winslow doubtful, is the fact that,
at this time, the plague was raging in Leyden, and
on this account all public funerals were suspended.
Sumner reports that this was customary in Ley
den, even if the deceased had not died of the plague.
For this statement he offers no authority.
White, however, asserts distinctly that Robin
son was not afflicted with the plague, and that
his friends were permitted freely to see him. If
this was true, there is nothing unlikely in the state
ment that Robinson's funeral was attended by
ministers and members of the University.
Even Sumner 's statement is not to be accepted
too literally. Dr. Dexter made an examination1
of the facts which Sumner urges in support of his
argument, and he found as a result of his inves
tigations that " the storm [of the plague] had
passed before Robinson died; and, though the
plague may still have been lingering in the city,
it had at that time ceased 'raging' in Leyden."
Another point to be borne in mind when we
come to sift this matter of a public funeral, is that
the words "accompanied him to his grave" do
not refer to any long procession or stately cere
mony. The place of burial was only across the
1 See Mass. Hist. Soe. Proceedings, January, 1872, pp. 184, 185.

318 JOHN ROBINSON
street from Robinson's house. This house was
in immediate proximity to the University of
which Robinson was a member and certainly well
known. There is, therefore, no reason whatever, either
on the one hand to infer a stately ceremony and
great procession of professors and preachers, or,
on the other, to think of an obscure and private
funeral. Undoubtedly, members of the Univer
sity were present; doubtless, the service was con
ducted by some minister of a Reformed Church
and the body of the Separatist pastor was laid
to rest with dignity and honor in the grave that
had been prepared for it under the floor of St.
Peter's Church.
For many years the location of Robinson's
grave was unknown. Certainly it was a mistake
of Prince to state that he was buried in the chan
cel of a church which had been granted to his
congregation by the government. We have seen
that no such grant was made the Leyden brethren
by the magistrates.
The credit for locating the burial place belongs
to George Sumner, who found in a small closet in
St. Peter's Church at Leyden a number of dusty
record books, one of which contains a list of burial

LAST YEARS IN LEYDEN 319
fees of Leyden churches. Here, under the record
of St. Peter's Church is found this:
[1625] [florins]
10 Mart. Open en huer van Jan Robens engels
predekant 9
(Opening and rent for John Robinson, English
preacher, 9 florins) 1
This record, therefore, informs us that the sum
of nine florins was paid for opening the grave and
renting it for a period of years. This payment
was made six days after the interment. There
is a record of this in the book of interments of
the city as follows:
[1625]
4 Maart. Jan Roelends, Predicant van de Eng-
elsche Gemeente, by Let Klockhuijs, —
begraven in de Pieter 's Kerk.
(John Robinson, Preacher of the English congre
gation, by the Belfry, — buried in the Peter's
Church). *
Two points are of interest in this matter of
the interment and rent. Sumner claimed that the
sum, nine florins, was the lowest paid for any per
son whose burial is recorded.2 This seemed to
him to indicate a condition of considerable pov
erty, since only journeymen-weavers and persons
1 Facsimile in Sumner's "Memoirs," opposite p. 71.
2 Ibid., p. 56.

320 JOHN ROBINSON
from the humblest walks of life paid such small
sums for grave rent. Dr. Dexter, however, inves
tigated the matter very thoroughly, and positively
contradicts these statements. He found from the
very registers which Sumner consulted that, out
of 253 records of burial rents in St. Peter's Church
and the neighboring churchyard during the year
1625, only seven were over nine florins, eighty
paid nine florins, and 128 were as low as four florins.
The average of all is a little over six florins. And
it is a significant fact that the rent paid for the
burial-place of Arminius in 1609 was only six
florins. Therefore, instead of being a burial in great
poverty, Robinson's burial was quite in accord
ance with that position of dignity and influence
which is assigned to him by writers like Winslow.
Still another point on which we have been mis
informed is the matter of the removal of remains
of bodies from graves in St. Peter's Church. Sum
ner stated that the sum paid for Robinson's burial
was " only for the hire, for a few years, of a place
immediately under the pavement in one of a large
number of square pits containing space sufficient
for four coffins. At the end of seven years, these
bodies were all removed."
The unpleasant idea, therefore, has come to be

LAST YEARS IN LEYDEN 321
very general that, after a short interval, the mortal
remains of Robinson were removed by the work
men of the church from the spot to which they
had been consigned by the devoted and bereaved
members of his remnant church.
This statement of Sumner, however, was not
confirmed by M. de Pecker, on whose authority
Sumner makes it, when, in 1865, Dr. Dexter ques
tioned him concerning it. Sumner had made the
statements which we have been quoting in his
communication to the Massachusetts Historical
Society in 1842. In 1871, Dr. Dexter investigated
the subject again, and published another opinion
on the authority of M. de Pecker, reinforced at
this second investigation by other satisfactory
authorities, that the bodies buried, as Robinson's
was, in St. Peter 's Church, "remained undisturbed
for fifteen years, at the end of which time the pit
was opened, the excavation was made deeper, so as
to sink out of sight whatever remained, and then a
new burial took place in the thus remade grave. "
On Friday, Jury 24, 1891, a bronze tablet to
the memory of Robinson was unveiled in Leyden.
The house which occupies the ground on which
Robinson's home stood, in Belfry Lane, had been
appropriately marked twenty-six years before by
a small inscription in these words :

322 JOHN ROBINSON
" On this spot lived, taught, and died John Rob
inson, 1611-1625."
It seemed fitting that a still larger memorial
should be erected to Robinson in Leyden. Action
to this end was taken at a meeting of the Con
gregational churches in the United States, held
in Detroit, Michigan, in 1877. A resolution was
then adopted expressing a hearty approval of
the plan to erect a memorial in Leyden "to
the memory of John Robinson, whose name will
ever head the list of the pastors of the Congrega
tional Churches of the United States." A com
mittee was appointed to take the matter in charge.
Funds were secured by subscription in America.
The committee decided upon a bronze tablet, to
be affixed to the outside wall of St. Peter's Church,
opposite Robinson's house. This wall contained
a recess in the brick work about seven feet high
and six feet wide in which a tablet would be shel
tered by a coping of stone. In this position the
memorial would indicate appropriately the place
of Robinson's burial and be near his house and
the University. The tablet bears a figure of a
ship in low relief, under which are the words,
"The Mayflower, 1620." Underneath this is the
inscription in severely plain Roman letters read
ing as follows:

LAST YEARS IN LEYDEN 323
IN MEMORY OP
Rev. JOHN ROBINSON, M. A.
Pastor of the English Church Worshiping over against this
Spot, A.D. 1609-1625, whence at his Prompting went forth
THE PILGRIM FATHERS
to settle New England
in 1620.

Buried under this House of Worship, 4 Mar. 1625
Aet XLIX Years.

In memoria aeterna erit Justus.

Erected by the National Council of the Congregational
Churches of the United States of America.
A. D. 1891.

The Dutch civil and ecclesiastical authorities
met the proposition to erect the monument most
heartily, and representatives of the city, the Uni
versity and of the Reformed Church spoke at the
exercises of dedication.1 They bore witness to
the loving memory in which the Separatist pas
tor's name is still held in Holland, where it is
forever linked with the ideals of religious liberty,
fidelity to principle, toleration, and loyalty to
revealed truth. This yet remains in Holland, as
in America, an abiding influence.
' See "Proceedings at the Unveiling of the John Robinson Memorial
Tablet in Leyden, Holland, July 24, 1891." Boston: Thomas Todd, 1891.

324 _ JOHN ROBINSON
A larger memorial to the life and character of
Robinson is the church building erected in Gains
borough, the corner-stone of which was laid June
29, 1896, by United States Ambassador Thomas
F. Bayard. Toward the completion of the struc
ture the Congregational churches in America made
a generous contribution in witness of their debt
to Robinson. The building is fittingly placed in
Gainsborough, not because this is surely the place
of his birth, but because the city is so closely con
nected with the Separatist movement and it seems
quite certain with Robinson himself.
Before turning from the records of these last five
years of Robinson's life, it is necessary to take up
a question which arises concerning his relation to
the Reformed Churches. There are certain docu
ments which demand consideration before an
opinion can be rendered.
The first of these is the testimony of Governor
Edward Winslow concerning the practice of Leyden
Church and its pastor, published in his "Hypoc
risie Unmasked," from which we have already
quoted on pages 244-247. Winslow says :
"I am earnestly requested to clear up another
gross mistake which caused many, and still doth,
to judge the harder of New England and the
churches there ' because (say the;/) the Church of

A MEMORIAL TABLET

LAST YEARS IN LEYDEN 325
Plymouth, which went first from Leyden, were
Schismatics, Brownists, rigid Separatists, &c, hav
ing Mr. Robinson for their pastor, who made
and to the last professed separation from the
other churches of Christ, &c. And the rest of
the churches in New England, holding commun
ion with that church, are to be reputed such as
they are.'
"For answer to this aspersion, first, he that knew
Mr. Robinson either by his doctrine daily taught,
or hath read his ' Apology,' published not long
before his death, or knew the practice of that
church of Christ under his government, or was
acquainted with the wholesome counsel he gave
that part of the church which went for New Eng
land at their departure and afterward, might
easily resolve the doubt and take off the asper
sion. "For his doctrine, I living three years under his
ministry, before we began the work of plantation
in New England, it was always against separation
from any of the churches of Christ; professing and
holding communion both with the French and
Dutch churches, yea, tendering it to the Scotch
also, as I shall make appear more particularly anon;
ever holding forth how wary persons ought to be in
separating from a Church, and that till Christ the
Lord departed wholly from it, man ought not to
leave it, only to bear witness against the corrup
tion that was in it.
" But if any object, he separated from the Church
of England and wrote largely against it, but yet

326 JOHN ROBINSON
let me tell you he allowed hearing the godly minis
ters preach and pray in the public assemblies ; yea,
he allowed private communion1 not only with them,
but all that were faithful in Christ Jesus in the king
dom and elsewhere upon all occasions ; yea, honored
them for the power of godliness, above all other the
professors of religion in the world."2
"Tis true, I confess, he was more rigid in his
course and way at first than toward his latter end;
for his study was peace and union, so far as might
agree with faith and a good conscience; and for
schism and division, there was nothing in the world
more hateful to him. But for the government of
the Church of England, as it was in the Episcopal
way, the Liturgy, and stinted prayers of the Church
then, yea, the constitution of it as National, and
so consequently the corrupt communion of the un
worthy with the worthy receivers of the Lord's
Supper, these things were never approved of him,.
but witnessed against to his death, and are by the
church over which he was, to this day."
"The next thing I would have the reader take
notice of is, that however the Church of Leyden
differed in some particulars, [it] yet made no schism
or separation from the Reformed Churches, but
held communion with them occasionally. For we
ever placed a large difference between those that
grounded their practice upon the word of God,
(though differing from us in the exposition or un-
1 For the definition of private as distinct from public communion see
pp. 170, 171.
2 Robinson remained English to the core, honoring the piety of his
fellow countrymen even when driven into Separation.

LAST YEARS IN LEYDEN' 327
derstanding of it) and those that hated such Re
formers and Reformation, and went on in anti
christian opposition to it and persecution of it, as
the late Lord Bishops did, who would not in deed
and truth (whatever their pretences were) that
Christ should rule over them."
" As for the Dutch, it was usual for our members
that understood the language and lived in or occa
sionally came over to Leyden, to communicate
with them, as one John Jenny, a brewer, long did,
his wife and family, &c, and without any offence
to the church."
"And for the French churches,1 that we held
and do hold communion with them, take notice
of our practice at Leyden, viz., that one Samuel
Terry was received from the French church there
into communion with us."
"For the truth is, the Dutch and French
churches, either of them being a people distinct
from the world, and gathered into a holy commun
ion, and not national churches, — nay so far from
it as I verily believe the sixth person is not of the
church; — the difference is so small (if moderately
pondered between them and us) as we dare not
for the world deny communion with them."2
This statement by Winslow furnishes the back
ground for an estimate of the significance of two
other documents which are concerned with Robin
son's relations to the Reformed Churches.
1 These were Reformed churches, like the Dutch.
2 Young, " Chronicles," Boston, 1841, pp. 387-395. Also " Hypocrisie
Unmasked." 1646, (copy in Boston Public Library), pp. 92-96.

328 JOHN ROBINSON
The first of these is the "Seven Articles which
y<= Church of Leyden sent to ye Counsell of Eng
land" in 1618,1 to which reference has been made
on page 232. The articles are brief and as follows:
1. To ye confession of fayth published in ye
name of ye Church of England & to every artikell
theerof wee do wth ye reformed churches wheer
wee live & also els where assent wholy.
2. As wee do acknolidg ye docktryne of fayth
theer tawght so do wee ye fruites and effeckts of
ye same docktryne to ye begetting of saving fayth
in thousands in ye land (conf ormistes & reformistes)
as ye ar called wth whom also as wth our bretheren
wee do desyer to keepe sperituall communion in
peace and will pracktis in our parts all lawfull
thinges. 3. The King's Majesty wee acknolidg for Su-
preame Governer in his Dominion in all causes and
over all parsons [sic], and y none maye decklyne or
apeale from his authority or judgment in any cause
whatsoever, but y in all thinges obedience is dewe
unto him, ether active, if ye thing commanded be
not agaynst God's woord, or passive yf itt bee,
except pardon can bee obtayned.
4. Wee judg itt lawfull for his Majesty toapoynt
bishops, civili overseers, or officers in awthoryty
onder hime, in ye severall provinces, dioses, con
gregations or parrishes to oversee ye Churches and
governe them civilly according to ye Lawes of ye
1 N. Y. Hist. Soe, "Collections," Series 2, Vol. iii, Part i, pp. 293-302.

LAST YEARS IN LEYDEN 329
Land, untto whom ye ar in all thinges to geve an
account & by them to bee ordered according to
Godlynes. 5. The authoryty of ye present bishops in y«
Land wee do acknolidg so far forth as ye same is
indeed derived from his Majesty untto them and
as ye proseed in his name, whom wee will also
theerein honor in all things and hime in them.
6. Wee beleeve yt no sinod, classes, convocation
or assembly of Ecclesiasticall Officers hath any
power or awthoryty att all but as ye same by ye
Majestraet geven unto them.
7. Lastly, wee desyer to geve untto all Superiors
dew honnor to preserve ye unity of ye sperritt
wtb all y feare God, to have peace wth all men
what in us lyeth & wheerein wee err to bee in
structed by any. Subscribed by
John Robinson
and
Will yam Bruster."
These articles were written for the express pur
pose of minimizing the differences between the Sep
aratists and the Reformed Churches in order that
the English authorities might more readily grant
the request of Leyden Church to remove to America.
They must be interpreted in the light of Robin
son's "Apology," issued a year later, especially
chapters 11 and 12, " Of Civil Magistrates" and " Of
the Church of England.''1 The "Articles" simply
'Works, 3:62-79.

330 JOHN ROBINSON
express in concise form propositions which are
more fully elaborated in the "Apology." They
show Robinson's growing agreement with the faith
and practice of the Reformed Churches, but they
do not contain the least suggestion that he ever
considered the Separation unnecessary or person
ally stood ready to abandon it. The statements
of the " Apology" are definite in this regard. Rob
inson held steadfastly that the constitution of the
Church of England was such that he must " make a
plain secession and separation from it."1 He could
not give the honor to it that was due "to the
Church of Christ, rightly collected and consti
tuted."2 The kindlier regard in which he came to
hold the bishops of the Church of England for their
personal Christian faith and character did not alter
his judgment that the episcopate as denned by
Robert Parker was a false and tyrannical institu
tion.3 In short, the Separation from the Church
of England was maintained to the last by Robin
son, however closely he might have been drawn
toward fellowship with the Reformed churches.
The last document to be considered is from the
Amsterdam Scotch Presbyterian Church records,
'Works, 3:63.
2 Ibid., p. 64.
3 Ibid., p. 69.

LAST YEARS IN LEYDEN 331
discovered by Dr. Henry Martyn Dexter in 1872, a
facsimile of which has been published.1 It is a sin
gle folio sheet, written in two hands. The text in
either case seems to correspond with the signature,
so that we probabfy have here a document written
and signed by the two men whose names it bears.
The translation is as follows :
I, the undersigned, declare by this that D. Rub-
bensonus, minister of the English church in this
place, which is called that of the Brownists, has
spoken with me many times of the schism between
their congregation and the congregation of the
other English in this country ; and that he has tes
tified many times that he was inclined to do his
best to remove this schism between them and the
others ; also, that he did not intend to bring up his
son as a minister of such a congregation, but much
preferred to have his service employed in the Dutch
congregations; furthermore, to this end he had
begun, through the good offices of D. Telius and
me, to move some good people in Middelburg that
they might furnish some honest support for his
son's studies for some years ; further, he has delcared
to me many .times that, finding here so many diffi
culties in his congregation in the way of accom
plishing this, he had therefore resolved upon re
moving with a good part of his congregation to
the West Indies, where he did not doubt that he
1 " Testimonium to John Robinson by A. Walaeus. Photolithogra
phic facsimile with modern transcript and English translation." Boston
Public Library * * G. 31. 83 A.

332 JOHN ROBINSON
could carry out this design. This has passed be
tween us in this way many times.
Datum in Leyden 25 May, 1628.
Antonius Walaeus,
Professor of Sacred Theology.
What has been testified here above on the
union of both the English churches in this country,
I, the undersigned, declare also to have heard from
D. Robinson, late deceased.
At Leyden, 26 May a. 1628.
Festus Hommius, Coll. Theol. Regens.

Concerning the circumstances under which this
paper was prepared, its history, and the reason for
its preservation, I am not able to gain any satis
factory information, and am thrown back entirely
upon internal evidence as to its meaning. There
is nothing to warrant any grave doubt as to the
genuineness of the document. Its authors were
members of the divinity faculty of Leyden Univer
sity. They were trustworthy men. They state
that they enjoyed an intimate acquaintance with
Robinson, which adds still further weight of evi
dence to our belief that he held a dignified and
closely personal relationship to the University, as
Winslow states that he did.

LAST YEARS IN LEYDEN 333
Two points are noteworthy:
1. What is meant by the other English congre
gation or churches "in this country"? Evidently
it does not mean Leyden, for Walaeus describes
Robinson as "minister of the English church in
this place"; if he had meant congregations in Ley
den he would naturally have written " the congre
gation of the other English here," rather than "in
this country." Hommius also uses "country" in
stead of "city." It would hardly seem to refer
simply to the Separatist churches in Amsterdam,
for the schism between them was not great enough
to warrant the emphasis laid upon it here.
Perhaps light may be thrown upon the matter
from the "Apology," where Robinson says: "Our
faith is not negative, as papists used to object to
the evangelical churches; nor which consists in the
condemning of others, and wiping their names out
of the bead-roll of churches, but in the edifying of
ourselves; neither require we of any of ours, in the
confession of their faith, that they either renounce,
or, in one word, contest with the Church of Eng
land, whatsoever the world clamours of us this way.
Our faith is founded upon the writings of the proph
ets and apostles, in which no mention of the Church
of England is made. We deem it our duty what
is found in them to ' believe, with the heart to right-

334 JOHN ROBINSON
eousness, and to confess with the tongue to salva
tion.' Rom. x. 10." 1
Before 1625 Robinson, while still holding to
Separation, as we have just shown, had perceived
that the remains of his church, with which he was
compelled to stay in Holland, must be built up
on a positive faith, to which the Separation was
not essential as a saving doctrine. This ideal he
evidently sought to realize, and was ready to wel
come members to his congregation from the body
of all English-speaking Christians in Holland.
There is certainly no other practical interpretation
to give to these words from the "Apology," and
this seems also to explain the purpose of Robinson
attested to by the document under consideration.
Robinson was not aiming at the organic union of
any two English-speaking congregations, so much
as the building up of a congregation on a positive
basis, of which the Separation, although a part,
was not an essential element.
2. The removal to the West Indies referred to is
open to question. Does it mean the general dis
cussion of the movement to America which took
place in 1620? Or did Robinson, finding himself
prevented from going to Plymouth, hope to go to
another place in the New World with a congrega-
' Works, 3:63.

LAST YEARS IN LEYDEN 335
tion gathered on this broader basis? There is no
record elsewhere of the latter purpose. White and
Blossom did not know of it. Robinson always
desired to go to Plymouth. The most reasonable
interpretation of the document would make this
refer to Robinson's persistent desire to go to Ply
mouth with his Leyden congregation.
The fact that he was desirous of having his son
educated for the ministry in the Reformed Church
is not strange; it implies no abandonment of the
Separation or repudiation of the twelfth chapter
of the "Apology." Robinson was in closest sym
pathy with the Reformed Church; he finally saw
no future for a Separatist church in Leyden, even
in the light of his ideal for its broader and more
positive structure; the Reformed Church seemed
therefore the best place for his son to exercise his
ministry. If we were to make a conjecture concerning the
significance of the document which we have thus
considered it would be this : when, after Robinson's
death, members of his family and church desired to
enter the fellowship of the Reformed churches, this
testimonial from theological professors who knew
him was drawn up, in order that their admission
might be made easier and their heartier welcome
assured. The testimonial itself is explained by
the "Apology," with which it is consistent.

XV
THE MAN AND HIS PLACE IN HISTORY

CHAPTER XV
THE MAN AND HIS PLACE IN HISTORY
There is no picture and no recorded description
of Robinson. We have nothing from which to
make any inference as to his personal appearance.
We do know the character of his mind and heart
and the sweetness and strength of his spirit, how
ever, and this is far more important.
Naturally the first light in which we tend to
regard him is as a controversialist and a defender
of the doctrines of the Separation. To the major
ity, without doubt, the mention of Robinson's
name suggests a stern, rigid defender of a faith.
Therefore, we will consider Robinson briefly as
he stands before us in the attitude of a controver
sialist. We must remember that he entered this
field, not because he chose to do so in obedience
to any native bent in disposition, but because he
was forced to do so. His desire was for pastoral
work and not for contention or controversy.
When he once became a champion he was pro
nounced and persistent. He records the struggle
339

340 JOHN ROBINSON
through which he passed in entering the Separa
tion, and then confesses that he carried it to the
bitter end. The spirit in which he carried on his
battles, however, was irenic. As Winslow says,
" His study was peace and union so far as might
agree with faith and a good conscience; and for
schism and division, there was nothing in the
world more hateful to him." :
There is abundant proof of this on every side
when we come to his preserved writings. Perhaps
there is not a better illustration of this than the
preface to his "Lawfulness of Hearing," which
has already been quoted on pages 179-182.
Robinson was honest in the use of a conflicting
argument. This is in marked contrast to the
practice of many of those opposing him. One
who reads widely in the literature of controversy
soon learns to expect from any controversialist
the claim that the adverse party has dealt unfairly
with his arguments. Robinson occasionally makes
this complaint, but expressly disavows any inten
tion to use such a method himself. He sought to
state the positions of his antagonists, he says,
"without any the least wrong (to my knowledge)
unto him or his cause; as, having left out nothing
' "Hypocrisie Unmasked," p. 93, quoted in Dexter, "Congregational
ism as Seen" p. 406.

THE MAN AND HIS PLACE 341
in his Writing, which might seem to bring advan
tage to his purpose. " 1 We have found no cases
in which Robinson's opponents claim that he has
been dishonest in his treatment of their attitude.
He was sometimes harsh in his invective, 2 but
it was the custom and spirit of the time, and,
as we have noticed elsewhere, when Robinson's
terms are compared with those employed by the
other Separatists, or, almost without exception,
by any of the controversialists of the time, they
are far less harsh.
There is always one greatest fact about a man.
If we grasp that fact, we have the secret of his
strength and the clue to the interpretation of his
character. The character of Robinson must be
interpreted from the standpoint of religion. Reli
gion seemed to him the principal thing about a
nation or about an individual.3 It certainly was
the principal fact about him. He tells his friends
that the two realms in which he takes his chief
delight are divinity and logic.4 We may question
the soundness of his logic, but never the con
sistency of his religion. He conceived religion
on its personal side as that relationship which
'Works, 3:286.
2 Ibid., 3: 285, 305.
3 Ibid., 1:32.
4 Ibid., 3:330.

342 JOHN ROBINSON
the individual bears to his God.1 The religious
man, as Robinson regarded him, recognized
always the relations of civil society. The obliga
tions of family and state are not dissolved by
religion; they are sanctified by it. The sanction
of good government and stable homes is religion.
John Robinson never inclined in the least toward
a hierarchy. He defended the state and the civil
ruler, and taught that the same obedience was due
the magistrate, whether he were a Christian or a
pagan. No tendency such as that which resulted
in the anarchy at Muenster found sanction in
Robinson's teaching.
We have taken a brief view of Robinson's the
ology in the consideration of the defense of the
Dort creed. The religious life of Robinson is
more winsome than his dogma. The sternness of
his theology is more pronounced than the rigor
of his personal religious life. That life gathers
about a personal relationship between his own
soul and God. It is the God of the Covenant
who rules in the world that he has made. Rob
inson does not lay as great emphasis upon the
personal, spiritual mastership of Jesus, or the
discipleship of the Christian, as he does upon
the covenant obligation of the individual soul to
' Works, 1 : 33.

THE MAN AND HIS PLACE 343
God. His religious life centered itself in God the
Father. His whole view of the world was colored by
his personal religion. This is seen in his concep
tion of the physical order, which is the work of
God's hands. " The artisan leaves his work, being
once formed, to himself," he says, "but God, by
continual influx, preserves and orders both the
being and motions of all creatures."1 The man
ner in which Robinson seems to catch a glimpse
of the great laws according to which the natural
order is controlled is exceedingly interesting. The
sun and moon and stars have such an influence
upon the earth that they are able "to change,
order, and dispose the air, earth and water." They
are thus seen to be endowed with virtues "far
above the most precious pearls, or any earthly
quintessence." (Job 38: 31-33.) Their position
produces the natural changes which we see in the
air and water. At the same time it does not
remove the personal activity of God from the
physical world. It rather makes God's personal
presence the more necessary, just as the complex
variety of a clock's movements is a tribute to the
wisdom and skill of the man who made the clock.
In this way Robinson sought to do justice to the
'Works. 1:15.

344 JOHN ROBINSON
ordered course of the physical universe, and also
save the doctrine of God's personal presence in it
as its Creator and Governor.
There is nothing in Robinson's writings to
show that he found delight in the natural world
for its own sake. The world seemed to him to
manifest God; but there is nowhere any sign that
he rejoiced, like Luther, in woods and flowers,
sunny days and blue skies. The great German
could feed his soul on the outlook over the beau
tiful Thuringian forest from the Wartburg, or
take keen delight in an excursion from Witten
berg into the country Of this there is no evidence
in Robinson. Not once does he express any re
joicing in the beauty of rural England or Holland.
Robinson's conception of the social order is
colored very often by his sense of the prevalence
and awfulness of human sin. There is little true
good in the world, he says:
"In heaven is only rest without labor; in hell,
restless pain and torment: and as sin makes the
earth, which is between both, liker to hell, than '
heaven; so God for sin hath given to the sons of
man sore travail to afflict them upon earth."1
Robinson thought of the awful punishments in
flicted upon sinners, and there seemed to be noth-
' Works, 1:114.

THE MAN AND HIS PLACE 345
ing fearful enough to warrant it; but when he
looked around in daily life and saw the manner
in which men lived in sheer contempt of God, it
seemed to him as if no punishment could be severe
enough for sin.1
Robinson is not a pessimist and purveyor of
despair, however; there is another side to his
view of life. All men are, he confesses, the chil
dren of wrath, and the world is lost in sin; but
upon this dark background appears the full radi
ance of his ideal of human salvation. Robinson's
hope and joy in the glorious thought of human
redemption are simply unbounded. His soul
leaps at the thought of the life of the saints of God
on earth. This is a very heaven. The little com
munity of believers whom he served in the min
istry was filled with the "beauty of Zion and the
glory of the Lord." To him this fact was an
experimental comfort that far outweighed the de
pression which his sense of the world's sin might
naturally have had upon him.
Therefore Robinson was not a pessimist; his
work was done in hopefulness, sweetness and
good cheer. A weaker soul might have become a
prophet of despair if he were compelled to reach
his final conclusion concerning the meaning of life-
'Works, 1:214.

346 JOHN ROBINSON
as a whole from this initial consciousness of the
fearful character of human sin. This serious,
somber tendency in Robinson was offset by the
sanity and hope of his dominant mood. He took
the same view of himself that he took of the world.
"When I consider," he says, "how little good
I myself do, in my meanness, and others my like,
to that which I should, and might do, if I did
my utmost, I find reason to be most angry at
myself, and mine own unprofitableness."
Out of the self-rebuking conclusions of these peri
ods of introspection, he always comes with his
soul "filled with spiritual joy." This joy grows
out of his assurance of personal salvation. He
breaks out at one time with this:
" How much I am comforted in this very con
sideration, against my vile and corrupt nature,
which, notwithstanding, I am persuaded the Lord
will never so far suffer to rebel, as that it shall not
be tamed and subdued by this strong hand of God,
without which it might every day and hour so
hazard my salvation."1
It is not always easy to appreciate such a tem
per as this. It is the manner in which Paul looked
at his life. Sometimes with strong cryings the
soul breaks forth, "0 wretched man that I am!
who shall deliver me from the body of this death?"
1 Works, 2: 227.

THE MAN AND HIS PLACE 347
Then the spirit asserts its dominant mood and
shouts its song of victory, "I thank God through
Jesus Christ my Lord." To one who does not
appreciate the Christian experience, such a record
of seeming conflict between despair and rejoicing
seems inconsistent. Men who report the experi
ence are generally misjudged. Francis of Assisi
is seen standing in the presence of his angry
father, having renounced even the clothing that
covered him, or wandering among the robbers
on Mount Subasio and thrown by them into the
snow. It all seems so hard, so bitter and so un
lovely! Francis singing for joy on Mount Subasio
even while the robbers stripped him; Francis with
his companions winning village after village in the
Umbrian plain, by the very contagion of their joy,
to a new life of hope and righteousness: — these
facts are not regarded by him who has taken of
fense at renunciations and leper hospitals. These
are the facts that interpret Francis of Assisi, how
ever. A more radiantly happy soul never exulted
before God than the man of utter poverty and
sacrifice. All the great exemplars and defenders of the
Christian faith have had this deep distress and
this supreme rapture. Individual temperament
modifies the experience in its details; but the

348 JOHN ROBINSON
fundamental attitude toward sin and salvation
is common to them all. The Separatist pastor
never can be called cold, joyless or stern by
those who know the real experience of his heart.
This vivid conception of the meaning of personal
salvation resulted in that passion for righteous
ness in which we must seek more and more for
the real cause of the Separation. It has been
common to hold that the Separation was grounded
in a failure to comprehend the great law of devel
opment in the church, through a lack of historical
knowledge and appreciation; but chiefly in the
Calvinistic theology, which demanded a church
made up of the elect. 1 That all these were reasons
for the Separation is not to be denied. The idea
of development is given scant recognition by Rob
inson; and he was a Calvinist of the Calvinists.
But all these interpretations fail to take sufficient
notice of the passion for righteousness which was
the great practical motive in the work of men like
him. The Separation was not a movement in
spired by any a priori idea of the church as the
body of the elect; it was not undertaken or car
ried out with the supreme purpose of embodying
a dogma in an institution. It was inspired by a
zeal for righteousness; its genius was practical
' See Weingarten, "IndependentismusundQuaekerthum," pp. 12, 13.

THE MAN AND HIS PLACE 349
and not dogmatic. Robinson was a reformer
first and an advocate and a theologian afterwards.
So was Robert Browne. We must never lose this
element from the story of the Separation.
Robinson was not a headstrong and inconsid
erate champion of reform. In his "Essays" no
less than in his controversies he stands before us
as a man of wide and discriminating observation.
His catholicity of outlook upon life saved him
from the snare of bigotry and intolerance. Every
reform is full of danger. Every reformer stands
in peril of narrowness and of failure to compre
hend the wider relations of the cause that is dear
to its champion; but here Robinson does not
break down.
The picture is briefly this : A young, enthusiastic
Christian preacher and pastor, in the orders of
the Church of England, yearned with all his soul
to see the visible, practical results of his preach
ing and pastoral care in the changed lives and Chris
tian character of the people. He found himself
hemmed in on every side by the theory and con
stitution of a state church. Accepting as he did
the full, final authority of the Scriptures, and
believing that a righteous life was the inevitable
issue of regeneration in the soul, he sought the
solution of his difficulty in the New Testament.

350 JOHN ROBINSON
There he found an organization of the church
which was not only unlike but contrary to the
parish unit and the episcopal authority of the
Church of England. He found the solution of
his problem in the complete secession from the
system of government with which he was con
nected. His Calvinistic theology helped him on
to his decision; but the first impulse and the con
trolling motive in the entire movement were prac
tical and not doctrinal.
Robinson was a man of wide reading and fairly
profound learning. His "Essays" especially dis
close acquaintance with the great classical and
church writers. These he does not treat in any
critical way, nor does he seem to regard them for
the intrinsic value of their style or thought. He
uses them rather as reflecting and illustrating
human life in its many aspects and interests. In
this he resembles Martin Luther.1 This width
of reach with which Robinson cast his net, in
drawing his observations "out of the great vol
ume of men's manners," is noteworthy. His lit
erary work was narrowed for the most part to the
necessities of partisan debate; he ministered to a
small community which was fighting for life under
hard conditions. It would have been natural for
1 See Kolde, "Martin Luther," 1: 41, 95.

THE MAN AND HIS PLACE 351
him to confine his study to the acquisition of mate
rial to strengthen his arguments and stay his soul
in conflict. But he did not limit himself in this
way. The larger human interest never was lost
in the heat and narrowness of partisan conflict.
As a matter of course he was preeminently a
student of the Christian Scriptures. These he
studied and used at first hand. He was familiar
with the Septuagint, Vulgate, and English trans
lations of the Bible; he used commentaries and
interpretations. But his appeal was always to
the "Word" directly.1 The critical temper was
foreign to him. He has slight use for the Church
Fathers, who seemed to him to have been respon
sible for introducing and defending a false order
of the church.
There is a merry side to the man, as we have
noticed already from an examination of his "Es
says." Many a dreary page of painful polemic
is lightened up by a jest or a bit of humor. His
themes are serious and his style inclined to be
severe. In the "Essays" and the " People's Plea"
he is especially happy in illustrations. He com
pares an opponent who has striven to make a good
appearance with a poor argument to "the stage-
player, who, with too much wiping of his borrowed
'Works, 3:297, 304, 311.

352 JOHN ROBINSON
beard, pulls it from his face, and so betrays his
bare chin."1 In another place, he discovers the
inconsistency in the arguments of an opponent
and says if only his antagonist had remembered
the command not to yoke an ox and an ass to
gether he would not have argued so badly.
In one of his essays he turns sharply against
rich men who have little wisdom to save them.
" A poor and plain person, seeing a Dives ruffle
in silks and glitter in gold and silver, is half ready
to worship him as a petty god many times; but
after finds by his speech and other carriage, by
which a fool and wise man are differenced, that
if he had so done, he had but worshipped a golden
calf."2 Thus Robinson, the theologian, reformer, con
troversialist, had a merrier side. He knew how to
jest as well as how to preach or debate. It is this
less known side of his personality that consti
tutes the greater charm of the man. He is not
deficient on the friendly side of his character.
Had he lived to-day he would have been a desira
ble travel-companion for a summer holiday; one
would have been ready to cast a fly with him in
the Maine waters during the ministerial vacation.
One of the strongest impressions that Robinson
' Works, 1 : 185.
2 Ibid., 1:125.

THE MAN AND HIS PLACE 353
makes upon us is that he is a growing, developing
personality. From the first clear view which we
gain of him until the very end of his life, it is pos
sible to follow him step b3^ step in the course of
his development. This fact gives his character
its splendid human interest. He is a vital part of
the movement of his time, making it and made
by it. He answers our desire for a living per
sonality, advancing in mental grasp and positive
achievement with the years.
The strength of Robinson's personality is best
apprehended by considering the impression which
he made upon his contemporaries and, most of all,
by recalling the history of his own congregation.
William Bradford and William Brewster were
strong men. Of this there can be no question.
They set their mark deeply upon the subsequent
life of New England. And for a man to hold their
deep respect, loyal love and self-sacrificing fol
lowing, as Robinson did, meant great personal
strength on the part of the pastor.
Bradford's tribute to Robinson1 is earnest and
comprehensive of all his strong qualities; but the
testimony concerning the impression which Rob
inson's personality produced is not confined sim
ply to the witness which men like Bradford bore.
' " Of Plimoth Plantation, " 24 ff . N. E. Memorial, 353.

354 JOHN ROBINSON
The whole history of the Leyden church is the
larger and conspiring witness to the same fact.
To be sure, such men as Bradford, Brewster, Cush
man, Carver and Thomas Fuller were members
of the congregation, and that in itself gave it a
character far higher than the Ancient London
Church or Smyth's congregation ever had. It is
useless to speculate upon the manner in which
Johnson and Ainsworth might have prospered
in the care of the Leyden congregation, or how
far John Robinson might have succeeded in blend
ing and saving the discordant elements which made
up the Ancient London Church. The fact is that
the Leyden pastor made his congregation and the
congregation made its pastor. It is one of those
rare reactions of personal influence which it is a
joy to contemplate and a pleasure to record. The
situation that confronts us in history is simply
this: in the development of a radical movement
involving not only a theory of church govern
ment, but the founding of an institution to
express the ideal, every effort to achieve the
practical realization had gone to pieces, and the
ideal itself had become discredited, owing to
the lack of a dominant personality strong enough
and far-sighted enough to master and promote
the practical enterprise. At last a man emerged,

THE MAN AND HIS PLACE 355
able, not only essentially to modify the ideal and
to commend it, even to its former critics, by its
sweetness and sanity, but also to organize an
institution which realized the ideal with almost
perfect success. To achieve this required a great
personality. It required also great personalities
upon which to act. To be a leader and molder
of strong men, however, requires a stronger man.
The master of the ideal, the molding force, upon
Bradford and Brewster, at least during the Ley
den sojourn, the shaper of the first successful Sep
aratist congregation, and therefore the virtual
founder of Congregationalism, was John Robinson,
the Pastor of the Pilgrim Fathers.

INDEX

Act of Supremacy, 11
Act of Uniformity, 11
Ainsworth, Henry, Inclined toward Democratic Organization
of the Church in Amsterdam, 191
Controversy with Johnson, 193
Ames, William, Sketch of, 166, 167
Amsterdam, Moral and Religious Conditions in, 88
Anabaptism, Repudiated by Robinson, 219, 220
Ancient London Church, organized, 21; in Amsterdam, 89;
relations to Leyden Church in the Johnson-Ainsworth
quarrel, 193-198
Anglican Church, a true Church according to Canons of 1603-4,
25; its apostolic character denied by Robinson, 113
Anglican Party Denned, 12
"Apologia" or "Apology, "Loccasion of writing, 209; its spirit,
210
Archbishops, 27
Aristocracy, an element in Barrowism, 20
Arminius, James, 157
Atonement, Robinson's Doctrine of the, 155, 156
Baptism, Robinson's teaching concerning, 220, 221
Barrow and Barrowism, 19, 21
Bastwick's Testimony Concerning Robinson, 72
Baynes, Paul, Robinson hearsliis lecture, 73
Benefice, Plurality of, 35, 36
Bernard, Rev. Richard, a Puritan preacher, 69; formed a
Separatist church, 82; wrote "Christian Advertisements,"
111

358 INDEX
Bishops, 27
Blossom, Thomas, letter regarding Robinson's desire to go to
Plymouth, 308; announced Robinson's death, 314
Bradford, William, prominent member of Scrooby congrega
tion, 50; described leading members of Scrooby Church,
94, 95; reported Robinson's dispute with Episcopius, 158
Brewer, Thomas, arrested in Leyden and taken to England,
215. 216
Brewster, William, practical religious activity in England, 43;
postmaster at Scrooby, 47; service to Scrooby Church,
50, 51; ruling elder in Leyden, 205; printed Calderwood's
"Perth Assembly," 215; with Robinson originated plan
of removal to America, 230; signed the "Seven Articles,"
232, 329; sent to England by Leyden Church in 1619, 234.
Browne, Robert, Life and Teaching, 16-18
Calderwood, David, invited to partake of communion by Rob
inson, 185; friend of Robinson, 222
Canons of 1603-4, 24-38
Carleton, Sir Dudley, found obnoxious book printed by Brew
ster, 215
Cartwright, Thomas, teaching, 13, 14
Carver, John, deacon in Leyden, 206; sent to England by Ley
den Church in 1617, 231
Chadderton, Laurence: Robinson heard him lecture, 72
Church, — in Robert Browne's teaching, 17; defined by Rob
inson, 120-122; not to consist of more members than can
meet together in one place, 210; a national, attacked by
Robinson, 119; gathered into covenant and organized
with officers; the difference, 96-98
Churches, — their use by Separatists, 208, 209
Clyfton, Richard, — the Separatist, 49, 50; office in Scrooby
Church, 91, 92; dismissed to Ancient London Church, 90
Clyfton, Zachary, — important entry in his family Bible, 87
Communion, — extent of, between Christians, according to

INDEX 359
William Ames, 168; Robinson's discussion of, 165-185;
conditioned by faith and church order, 169; Robinson's
treatment of theme in " Essays," 297
Congregations of Separatists in London and the North of Eng
land, — no intimate connection between, 41
"Connivance at Sin," — Robinson's theory regarding, 116
Convocations of 1603-4, 24
Covenant, in the church, 121, 122
Cushman, Robert, — sent to England by Leyden Church in
1617, 231; in 1619, 234
Decrees, God's, — discussed by Robinson, 152
"Defence of Doctrine Propounded by the Synod at Dort," —
why written by Robinson, 160, 161
Democracy, — in relation to aristocracy and monarchy in the
church, 124, 125; term avoided by Robinson while its con
tent preserved, 201, 202
Dexter, Henry M., — discussion of the "Farewell Address,"
251-257; investigation of Sumner's claims regarding Rob
inson's death and burial, 317; found Walaeus-Hommius
document, 331
Discipline, Church, — how administered in Leyden, 200, 201
Durie, Rev. Robert, — pastor in Leyden, 135; admitted to
Leyden University, 144
Dutch Churches, — their theology, 157
Edward VI of England, — religious changes during his reign,
7,8
Elders, — their qualifications and authority, 198, 199; their
place in the congregation, 123-125; in Barrow's teaching,
21
Elizabeth, Queen, — religious changes during her reign, 10-22
Emigration from Leyden to America, — reasons for, 227-229;
decided upon, 237
England, — peculiar seed ground for Protestant Reformation, 5
Episcopius, Simon, — Robinson's debate with, 157-161

360 INDEX
Episcopate, — in teaching of Cartwright, 13; of Whitgift, Ban
croft, Bilson, 14
"Essays," Robinson's, — their value, 300
Euring, William, — copies out sermon by Yates for Robinson,
213
Exiles, English, — on the continent under Queen Mary, 9
"Farewell Address," the so-called, — reported by Edward
Winslow, 243-247; occasion of its delivery, 247-249;
Winslow's report questioned by George Sumner, 249;
internal evidence as to its genuineness, 250; Henry Mar
tyn Dexter's interpretation, 251-257; discussion of this
in detail, 253-257; consistency of this "Address" with
the body of Robinson's teaching, 258-263
Flight under Persecution, Robinson's discussion of, 217, 218
Fuller, Samuel, — chosen deacon in Leyden, 206
Gainsborough, — description of, 57, 58; Separatist congregation
in, 44-46; memorial church to Robinson erected there, 324
God, — His sovereignty and providence, 152
Gomarius, Francis, opponent of Arminius, 157
Gordon, Rev. Alexander, — his article on Robinson in "Dic
tionary of National Biography," 159
Greenwood, John, 19
Hall, Joseph, — wrote against Robinson, 110
Hampton Court Conference, 23
Helwisse, Thomas, Robinson's controversies with, 150, 217-221
Henry VIII of England, — religious changes during his reign,
5-7
Holland, — why sought by Separatists, 83
Hommius, Festus, — his testimony concerning Robinson,
331, 332
James I of England, — received Millenary petition, 22; called

INDEX 361
Hampton Court Conference, 23; refused to grant petition
of Leyden Church for religious freedom in America, 233
Jegon, John, 62, 69
Jepson, William, — joint purchaser with Robinson of Leyden
house, 137
Johnson, Francis, — pastor of the Ancient London Church, 21;
went to America, 229; inclined toward aristocratic organ
ization of the church, 190-192
" Lawfulness of Hearing" published, 178; the preface quoted,
179-183
Lawne, Christopher, — claimed as author of "The Profane
Schisme," 167
Leyden Church, — removal from Amsterdam, 133, 134; not
granted place of worship by authorities in Leyden,135,136 ;
their form of worship, 207; described by Winslow, 223;
described by Bradford, 140-143; determined to move to
America, 231; reasons for this determination, 227-229;
petitioned Dutch New Netherland Co., 235; sent "Seven
Articles " to England, 328
Lord's Supper, — in canons of 1603-4, 36
Mary, Queen, — religious changes during her reign, 8, 9
Merchant Adventurers, — their relation to Robinson, 306-310
Millenary Petition, 22, 23
Ministers, Anglican, — sphere of their labors defined by canons,
29-32
Murton, John, author of "A True Description," 150
Necessity and Compulsion, — how different, 153
Norwich, Religious conditions in, 68, 69
Officers of the Church, how many, 126, 127
"Of Religious Communion," published in 1614, 150, 169; its
influence in Amsterdam, 173-175

362 INDEX
Order of the Church, — an object of faith, 117, 118
Orders in the Church of England, Candidates for, 28, 29
Paget, John, — pastor in Amsterdam, 88; published "An
Arrow," 173, 174
Parish, in the Church of England, 27; attacked by Robinson,
119
Perkins, William, influenced Robinson, 64
Polity, Church, an object of faith, 117, 118
Prayer Book,— of Edward VI, 7; in canons of 1603-4, 37
Presbytery, its functions treated by Robinson, 198, 199
Printing, Difficulty of, in England, 103, 104
Puritanism, Beginnings of, in England, 11; defined by Cart
wright, 13, 14
Puritans, become a party, 12; oppose Separatists, 81, 82; many
kept from becoming Separatists by hardship, 228
Reformation, the Protestant, — its course in England sketched,
5-24
Reformation of Abuses impossible in Church of England, the
ground of the Separation, 114-117
Reformed Churches, Robinson's relation to, 207, 208
Robinson, John, no contemporary biography of, 55; personal
elements in his preserved writings, 55; date and place of
birth, 56; ancestry, 58; life in Cambridge, 60-62; religious
experience called conversion, 63, 64; took orders in the
Church of England, 65, 66, 93; work in Norwich, 67-72;
troubles with ecclesiastical authorities, 69; sought to free
himself from censure of the Church of England, 70;
sued unsuccessfully for appointment to a chaplaincy,
70, 71; went to Cambridge from Norwich, 71-74;
reached Gainsborough, 74; subjective history of his
decision for Separation, 74-78; chosen pastor of
Scrooby Church in Amsterdam, 93, 94; ordained pas
tor of Scrooby Church, 96; recognized and defined

INDEX 363
tendencies to disruption in Separation, 99, 100; wrote
against William Ames in Amsterdam, 102, 103, 110,
167; a defender of the Separation, 109; the spirit of his
earliest controversies, 112; attacked royal supremacy,
113; denied apostolic character of the Church of England,
114; defined the grounds of the Separation, 115-117; ac
cepted Thirty-nine Articles, 117, 150; refused at first to
join John Smyth on the ground of disagreement concern
ing rigid Separation, 128; committed himself to rigid Sep
aration, 128, 129, 165; reasons for change, 129, 130;
bought house in Leyden, 136-140; not a communist, 139,
140; names of family, 143, 312; admitted to Leyden Uni
versity, defended Calvinistic creed of Dort, 149-161 ; his
dogmatic views inflexible, 151; subtle distinctions in his
reasoning, 155; disputed publicly with Episcopius, 157-
161; his use of Scripture, 172; Paget's testimony concern
ing his fellowship in Leyden, 174, 175; wrote "Manu
mission" to Ames, 1615, 175, 176; wrote letters to church
es in London and Amsterdam, 176 ; taught that Separatists
might attend the services in the Church of England, 177;
his tolerant spirit shown in preface to "Lawfulness of
Hearing," 179-183; answered request of thirty members
of the Ancient London Church for counsel, 193, 194; went
to Amsterdam after deposition of Ainsworth from office,
194, 195; futile effort to reconcile factions in Amsterdam,
195, 197; proposed "middle way" to Ancient London
Church, 196; work as pastor in Leyden, 206, 221; relation
to Reformed Churches in Leyden, 207, 208; controversy
with Yates, 212-214; went to Rotterdam with Brewer,
216; controversy with Helwisse regarding baptism and
flight from persecution, 217, 218; his missionary motive,
228 ; originated with Brewster the plan for emigration to
America, 230; a prime mover in all negotiations to this
end, 231; drew up articles defining relation of Leyden
Church to other churches, 232; published "Apologia,"

364 INDEX
1619 and 1625,209,311; persistent in the emigration plan,
234; preached to people before departure for America,
238; went with emigrating members to Delfshaven, 238;
took leave of them, 239; examination of the so-called
"Farewell Address," 243-263; preached two sermons
previous to departure of emigrants to America, 248;
"Essays" published, 1625, 267; their value as interpreting
his character, 268; his essay on "Religion," 270-276; his
essay on "The Use and Abuse of Things," 277-279; his
idea of God, 280-284; compared with St. Francis of Assisi,
284, 347; his essay "Of Created Goodness," and practical
counsels concerning conduct, 285-288; his regard for the
authority of Scripture, 291; his essay "Of Truth," 293,
294; his essay "Of Society," 295-297; his essay "Of
Health and Physic," 298-300; life in Leyden, 1620-1625,
303-323; regarded as pastor of Plymouth Church, 303;
wrote letter to emigrants, 304; intended to go to Ply
mouth, 306; removal opposed by Merchant Adventurers,
309; wrote and published several books, 1624, 1625, 311;
buried two children in Leyden, 312; his death, 313 ; funeral
in Leyden, 315-318; burial place, 318-320; memorial tab
lets in Leyden, 321-323; memorial church erected in
Gainsborough, 324; his relation to the Reformed Churches
in Holland examined, 324-335; testimony of Walaeus
and Hommius concerning this relationship, 331-335; as a
controversialist, 289, 339-341; his religion, 341-343; his
love of nature, 344; an optimist, 345; his passion for right
eousness, 347-350; his learning, 350; his impression upon
his church, 353; estimate of his place in history, 354, 355;
Professor Williston Walker's estimate, v
Royal Supremacy, defined, 25; attacked by Robinson, 113
Sandys, Sir Edwin, — aided Leyden delegates in England, 232
Scrooby, identified by Hunter, 42; general character of country
around, 43

INDEX 365
Scrooby Church, — Separatist congregation gathered there,
46-51; became object of ecclesiastical persecution, 81;
prevented from emigrating to Holland, 83-87; finally
reached Amsterdam, 88; maintained independent organi
zation there, 90; effected organization, 91-96; conditions
in Amsterdam uncongenial, 98,99, 190; petitioned Leyden
authorities for permission to settle there, 101 ; moved to
Leyden, 105 (See Leyden Church)
Separation, — in Browne's teaching, 16; in Barrow's teaching,
20; in Canons of 1603-4, 26; its grounds defined by Rob
inson, 115-117; its extent defined by Robinson, 127-130,
171; its extent in Amsterdam, 165
Separatists, in Middelberg, 18
"Seven Articles " of Leyden Church, 328-330
Smyth, John, — his connection with Separatists in Gains
borough, 45, 46; his congregation in Amsterdam, 89, 90;
opposed to Robinson, 93; formed church on Baptist prin
ciples together with Helwisse, 219
State and Church, — in Cartwright's teaching, 13; in Browne's
teaching, 17
Studley, Daniel, — wrote to Samuel Fuller denouncing Leyden
brethren, 192
Subscription, Oath of, 26, 33-35
Sumner, George, questioned Winslow's report of "Farewell
Address," 249; his discussion regarding Robinson's fu
neral, 316-318; located Robinson's burial place, 318
Thirty-nine Articles, — under Edward VI, 8; in canons of
1603-4, 26; accepted by Robinson, 117
Tickens (or Thickens), Ralph, joint purchaser with Robinson
of house in Leyden, 137
Virginia Company, granted patent to members of Leyden
Church; never used, 234

366 INDEX
Walaeus, A., testimony concerning Robinson, 331, 332
Weston, Thomas, counsellor of Robinson, 236
White, Bridget, wife of Robinson, 138
White, Jane, married Ralph Tickens, 137, 138
White, Roger, reported Robinson's death, 312, 313
Winslow, Edward, reported Robinson's so-called "Farewell
Address," 243-247; testimony concerning Robinson's
relation to other churches in Holland, 324—327; testi
mony concerning Robinson's funeral, 315
Wood, Henry, joint purchaser with Robinson of house in
Leyden, 137
Yates, John, opposed Robinson regarding lay preaching,
212-214

YALE UNIVERSITY

a39002 001853366b