would be allotted to the use of his congregation. It is a singular coincidence, that the Scottish church should have been established in Leyden the very same year, under the ministry of the Rev. Robert Durie. To this party of

English subjects a subsidy was granted, and the chapel of St. Catharine's Almshouse was assigned, which chapel they occupied till 1622, when "another was granted to them, attached to the Jerusalems Hof;" and in 1644 this also was exchanged for a still larger "room in the Kerk of the Bagyn Hof," which became the "Church of the English Reformed Community."* This coincidence of time in the settlement of Mr. Robinson and of Mr. Durie, and in the commencement of English worship by their respective communities at Leyden, has given rise to some mistakes with respect to Robinson's place of worship.†

As soon as arrangements for worship were completed, and the church was re-organized, Mr. Robinson received a

*Sumner's Memoirs of the Pilgrims, Appendix, page 24.

† Mrs. Adams, the wife of President Adams, visited Leyden in Sept. 12, 1786, and under the inspiration of an imaginary scene, thus writes-"I would not omit to mention that I visited the church at Leyden, in which our forefathers worshipped when they fled from hierarchical tyranny and persecution. I felt a respect and veneration, upon entering the doors, like what the ancients paid to their Druids." This church was pointed out to Prince, the American annalist, in 1714, by some of the oldest inhabitants, who learned from their parents that the building was devoted to English worship by the Separatists. This appears to have been an error arising from the misapprehension of the parties respecting the two different congregations which had co-existed in the city, and designated, in common parlance, “English Puritans." The Separatist church having be come extinct nearly a century, and having no historical existence in the place, the two might easily have been confounded at that distance of time.

Mr. Sumner has thoroughly investigated this subject, and his conclusion, as stated in this note, appears inevitable. Vide Memoirs

of the Pilgrims at Leyden, pages 9-14.

VOL. I.

c

call from the members to become their pastor, and was ordained to the office at their united and urgent request, having Mr. Brewster as his ruling elder. Under the trying circumstances in which the church was placed at Scrooby, it is probable that the formal call to the pastorship had not been given to Mr. Robinson, though he officiated as their minister.

It has been suggested previously, that Mr. Robinson did not receive "full orders" when connected with the Established church; and this might be a reason for being ordained at the present time. But even apart from this consideration, and had he been fully ordained in the national church, he would wish to be re-ordained by his own church at Leyden, and thus carry out the principle for which he so earnestly contended in his controversy with Murton and Bernard.* He regarded the ministry of the Church of England as a false ministry," derived as it was from the Church of Rome, and therefore to be repudiated by all who, acknowledging Christ as the Supreme Head of the Church, separated from her communion; and consequently, re-ordination would be indispensable.

The ordination was evidently performed by the church itself. Mr. Robinson says, "I was ordained publicly, upon the solemn call of the church in which I serve, both in respect of the ordainers and the ordained." He constantly insists, in his reference to the subject, that ordination is a church act, and for a specific church, and cannot be performed scripturally by any other parties called in to officiate on the occasion. He makes exception only in the case of the apostles, and the extraordinary officers of the apostolic churches, as Timothy and Titus, who were specially called "to ordain elders in every city."

* Vide vol. i. Defence of the Synod, &c., pages 452, 3, and vol. ii. A Justification, &c., pages 370—450.

+ Vide vol. i. Defence of the Synod of Dort, &c., pages 463, 4.

Settled over his flock, he zealously devoted himself to study and to labour on their behalf. He addicted himself especially to theological studies, and frequently attended. the lectures of the most distinguished and learned professors in the university. He became eventually one of its members. This privilege was not obtained till six years after his settlement at Leyden. The reason of this delay does not appear; but, as Mr. Sumner suggests, it is probable that objections were raised against him, as being an exile, and that the council were indisposed to confer the peculiar privileges of the university on a person so obnoxious to the English hierarchy at home.

The following is a copy of his admission, taken from the MS. register of members:

This incorporation with the university placed Mr. Robinson beyond the control of the town magistrates, and in addition to other privileges, entitled him to receive, free of town and state duties, half a tun of beer every month, and about ten gallons of wine every three months.*

The Calvinistic and Arminian controversies were rife at this period. The "Five Points" were daily battled for in the arena of the university, as they were the subjects of eager contest at a subsequent period in the Synod of Dort. Polyander and Episcopius were the leading antagonists at Leyden. Mr. Robinson constantly attended their lectures, with the view of becoming thoroughly acquainted with the mysterious themes involved in these discussions. He took the Calvinistic view of inspired truth, and became an earnest advocate of the doctrines now generally held by

* Sumner's Memoirs, pages 18, 19.

66

"Modern Calvinists." His "Defence of the Synod of Dort," and his animadversions on Mr. Smyth's Confession," contain expositions of his views of doctrinal truth. He plunged deeper into the profundities of the Divine decrees than modern theologians are disposed to venture; and conceded a more direct agency in the permission of evil than would be allowed by Calvinistic divines of the present day. But strenuous as he was for the doctrines, he was not less so for the duties of Christianity. He regarded them as inseparable: the one supplying the motive power to the performance of the other; the duties illustrating the doctrines; and belief and practice being together necessary to constitute the perfect Christian.*

Mr. Robinson was solicited by Polyander, Festus Hommius, and other professors, about this time, (1612,) to enter the lists against Episcopius, and conduct a public discussion on the great doctrinal questions of the day, with that distinguished man. He modestly declined the overture, alleging his incompetency, but, probably, because anticipating little good from such an exhibition. Still, pressed by his friends, he at length yielded; and for three days the discussion was carried on between himself and his learned antagonist, and terminated, as they declared, in the perfect triumph of their advocate and champion. †

The Arminian doctrines becoming extensively adopted by the national clergy, the States-General of Holland-the patrons and conservators of the national church!—summoned the celebrated "Synod of Dort," in 1618-19, to adjudicate on these controverted points.

The "Synod" pronounced its decision in favour of

* Vide vol. i. Defence of the Doctrine, &c. chap. i.-v. pp. 265485. Vol. iii. On Communion, &c. chap. vi. pp. 237-274.

+ Vide Bradford, in Young's Chronicles, pages 40, 41. Winslow's Narrative in Young, page 392.

66

Calvinism. Politicians and divines judged this would be a death-blow to Arminianism; the followers of Arminius were to be silenced for ever; and Episcopius, the distinguished Professor at Leyden, must bow in the dust before the Acta" of the conclave. Alas, for the decrees of councils! Episcopius and his adherents stood firm and erect, notwithstanding the solemn deliverances and angry menaces of the orthodox divines. Another power must therefore be invoked to enforce compliance with the decrees of the Synod, or punish the recusants for their obstinacy!

"The States-General soon confirmed this decree of the Synod. This being done, every preacher was called upon for subscription to the creed which the Synod had prescribed; and such as refused were at once deposed from office. Episcopius and his colleagues, who had been present at the Synod of Dort, were detained, by order of the government, at Dort, until the meeting of the commissaries of the States-General. They were then called upon, to know whether they would suspend their ministerial functions, cease writing or publishing their opinions, &c. This they declined to do. On the 27th June, 1619, they were summoned to the Hague by the States-General, and called upon to know whether they were ready to subscribe an agreement to abide by the terms which the commissioners had prescribed. This all but one (H. Leo) refused to do. Sentence of banishment was then pronounced upon them. They asked leave to return under escort to their homes, so as to put in order their family affairs, collect their dues, and discharge their debts. This was refused; and they were sent the next day, under the charge of an armed guard, to their respective places of banishment.

"In regard to the remonstrant preachers generally of Holland, they were not only forbidden to perform the duties of their office, but their flocks were forbidden to