Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T15:53:44.420Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

John Robinson and the Beginnings of the Pilgrim Movement

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 November 2011

Frederick James Powicke
Frederick James Powicke
Affiliation:
Stockport, England
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The scope of this article is strictly limited. It takes no account of the great issues, social, national, and international, which, in the course of time, flowed from the few simple folk “in the north parts” of England about Scrooby and Gainsborough who obeyed what they believed to be a divine impulse.

Others far more competent for the purpose have already dealt with, or will deal with, these. Nor does it do more than touch the details of the life into which the exiles passed at Amsterdam and Leyden. For on these, Dr. Dexter and his son — to mention but two of the workers in this fieldx — may almost be said to have spoken the last word. Nor does it follow the Pilgrims into the new world where they struck root with such heroic fortitude, except so far as is required to correct one or two somewhat inveterate mistakes. It is, in fact, limited to the man who, beyond any one else, was the chief spiritual influence in those earliest pioneers whose character and ideals imparted a permanent direction to the development of New England. At the same time, while relating the substance of what is known of Robinson, I have tried to state the truth with regard to the circumstances in which the Pilgrim movement took its start; and if, in so doing, it has seemed necessary to criticize adversely the conclusions of one writer in particular, my excuse must be that his narrative has been accepted, in some high quarters, as that of an authority on the subject whose word is final. It is not by any means final, as the sequel, I think, will show.

Type
Research Article
Information
Harvard Theological Review , Volume 13 , Issue 3 , July 1920 , pp. 252 - 289
Copyright
Copyright © President and Fellows of Harvard College 1920

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 See The England and Holland of the Pilgrims, 1906. Bk. VI, chap 3.

2 This discovery was made by Rev. Burgess, W. H., B.A. (author of John Smith the Se-Baptist) and communicated to the Christian Life (February, 1911), London, and to the Christian Register (Boston).Google Scholar

3 Wills in District Registry at York. Vol. 33, fo. 236; vol. 34, fo. 324. Cited by Burgess in his John Smith, etc., p. 317. Mr. Champlin Burrage prints Mr.Robinson's, will in Appendix D. Vol. I, pp. 326, 327 of his Early English Dissenters, 1912.Google Scholar

4 An inference from the fact that when admitted to be a member of Leyden University on August 5, 1615, he was in his 39th year.

5 Might there be a connection between this and the agitation which arose about the Millenary Petition and led Cambridge (June 9, 1603) to pass a “grace that whoever in that University should attack the doctrine or discipline of the Church of England should be suspended from all degrees already taken and forbidden all others”? Dexter, E. H., p. 337.

6 An extensive parish about ten miles west of Nottingham. Why this place should have been chosen for the marriage seems to be accounted for by the fact (recently brought to light) that one of Bridget White's brothers occupied a farm in the parish. For entry of the marriage, see Phillimore and Blagg's Nottinghamshire Parish Registers. Vol. VIII, p. 99. Robinson and his wife are entered as Mr. and Mistress.

7 He was not himself a member of St. Andrews “having” (he says) “my house … within another parish and my children baptized there.” Burrage, N. F., p. 17. For names of his family, see Dexter's E. H. P., p. 632. Two of his six children were born in Norwich, John and Bridget. Isaac, the third, was 92 years old in 1702, which gives 1610 as the year of his birth (Arber, p. 160).

8 Mr.Burgess, writes in the Hibbert Journal, October 2, 1916, p. 176, “I have … come to the conclusion that he was the fourth son of one ‘John Smyth,’ yeoman, of Sturton-le-Steeple. … There are several pieces of evidence which point to this young John Smith as being the man, none of them, indeed, decisive but weighty in their cumulative effect.”Google Scholar

9 Mr. John More, vicar in Robert Browne's time, was a Puritan — so was Mr. John Yates, vicar after 1616.

10 Burrage, N. F., p. 21.

11 Burrage, ibid., p. 21. Robinson himself says: “The way by which the ministers of St. Andrew's enter is not the plain way of the Lord but the crooked path of a Lord Bishop's ordination and approbation and of a Patron's presentation, yea whether the people will or no.” Ibid., p. 19.

12 In his Common Apologie against the Brownists … Hall, future Bishop of Exeter and Norwich, had probably known Robinson at Cambridge, and was now (1610) vicar of Waltham, Essex.

13 A Common Apologie of the Church of England, p. 145. Cf. the case of John Smith as Preacher to the City of Lincoln, 1600–02.

14 P. 20 of Robinson's Manumission, 1615.

15 P. 29 of Ames's Second Manuduction, 1625.

16 Whitley, J. S. Vol. I, pp. lvi, lvii.

17 Burgess, Smith, p. 85. The terms of the covenant are reported by Bradford (History, p. 13). If Smith indited the form, he might be indebted for the substance to Francis Johnson or even Robert Browne.

18 He was arraigned first, by the High Commissioners on November 10, 1607, and committed “to jail in the Castle of York for trial and further proceedings.” These took place on March 22, 1608, and, meanwhile he had remained a prisoner; for the indictment on the latter date runs — “Gervase Nevile of York Castle, Brownist or Separatist.” Dr. Usher (The Pilgrims and their History) seems not to be aware of the trial on March 22, else he could hardly say (p. 261) “Neville was permitted to testify without taking the oath and though committed to prison for a time was, after no long confinement, released without further examination or trial.” “Indeed Neville was handled with considerable charity” (p. 21).

19 I find no other mention of him in this connection, nor does Dr. Usher give any reference. According to Hunter, Francis Jessop seems to have resided at Heyton or Tilne, Scrooby. It was his nephew, Jessop, Wortley, who resided at Scrofton in the parish of Worksop. Collections, ed. 1854, pp. 126, 127.Google Scholar

20 One or two other slips may be mentioned. Thus (p. 4) Scrooby is said to be fifty miles north of Lincoln instead of about sixteen miles northwest, and (p. 26) it is said, “Two years before (i.e., in 1606) Smyth's congregation had gone from their own little district to Holland,” although the church was not gathered before the end of 1606, and Smith could still write himself “Pastor of the church at Gainsborough” in 1607 (see Letter of Smith to Bernard. Whitley, S. Vol. II, p. 331) and both companies were in Holland by August, 1608. Dr. Usher's great learning and competence, as exhibited particularly in his Reconstruction of the English Church — a work for which every serious student of the subject is thankful — appear to fail him whenever he touches on the Separatists. For a glaring example I may refer to Introduction (p. xxiv) of his Presbyterian Movement in the Reign of Queen Elizabeth (1905) where he says, “It was in 1585–86, when there came a sharp discussion over the details of Church government, that Brown, Harrison, Wright, Greenwood and others whom the Congregationalists regard as their prototypes separated from the movement.” The Brown here mentioned is (on p. xxxvi) identified with a member of the Oxford Classis. Evidently there is confusion. Neither this Brown nor Thomas Harrison (the noted Hebraist of Cambridge) nor even Robert Wright was a Separatist. Browne and Harrison the Separatists were named Robert, and the first Separatist church was set up by Robert Browne at Norwich in 1581.

21 Synodalis, Cardwell. Vol. I, pp. 164–166, note; p. 245, note. Cf. Whitley, S., Introduction, pp. l–li.

22 He almost “separated”—at first he showed the greatest eagerness to go forward and he actually refused to subscribe — but he soon sued for “reinstatement” in ways which excited Smith's scorn. Whitley, S. Vol. II, pp. 335, 336, 370.

23 Unless it be Cotton Mather's Magnalia. Bk. II, sec. 3 (as cited by Dexter, E. H. P., p. 391) where it is said that Bradford encountered the “wrath of his uncles” and “the scoff of his neighbours.” Mather is not a good witness; but even if he were, what he says refers only to Bradford.

24 Usher, Reconstruction of the English Church. Vol. I, p. 327.

25 Ibid., passim.

26 The circular enclosed a letter from the Privy Council to say that the time of grace notified “the 16th day of July last,” for the recalcitrants having now expired, it is the king's firm determination that since advice has not prevailed “authority shall compel.”

27 Whitley, S. Vol. I, p. li.

28 A Christian and modest offer of a most indifferent conference. Pamphlet by some “of the late silenced and deprived ministers.” Imprinted 1606. Rylands Library (uncatalogued).

29 Dr. Usher's own words may be quoted against him: “The severe penalties attached” (to the canons of 1604) “showed that the canons were meant to be obeyed, that a new day had dawned, when there should not only be law but penalties for breaking it and a coercive force sufficient to exact them from the guilty.” Reconstruction of the English Church. Vol. I, p. 383.

30 An act to retain the Queen's subjects in obedience. See Prothero, Select Statutes, 1558–1625, pp. 89–92. This act was continued by 39 Eliz. 18; 43 Eliz. 9; I James I, 25; 21 James I, 28.

31 In 1596 (see Preface to the Confession of Faith of certain people living in Exile, of that year) it was recorded that “twenty souls (including aged men and women) have perished in the prisons within the city of London only (besides other places of the land) and that of late years.”

32 Quoted by Burgess, Smith, p. 284.

33 Sir William Zouche to Sir Dudley Carleton, Rotterdam, Saturday, November 13, 1619: “About ten of the clock (last night) Master Brewer arrived, conveyed hither by the Beadle of the University, Master [John] Robinson and Master Kebel [John Keble] accompanied by two other of his friends: their names, I think, are not worth the asking.” Arber, S. P. F., p. 224.

34 See Preface to the Treatise of Religious Communion (Ashton, Vol. III, p. 103), where Robinson says he was “excepted against” by some of John Smith's people, when he was “chosen into office in this (Leyden) Church.” This could only have happened at Amsterdam.

35 Deacons also were appointed, but not a teacher nor a widow or deaconess — which is remarkable in view of Robinson's Appendix to Mr. Perkins' six principles of Christian Religion, questions 12–17, Robinson's works. Vol. III, pp. 429, 430, Ashton's ed.

36 Winslow adds as other reasons of unrest: (1) that they felt it grievous to live from under the protection of the State of England; (2) that there was a likelihood of losing the English language, the English names, and the English type of education; (3) that they were conscious of inability “to do good” among the Dutch, particularly in “reforming the Sabbath.” Young's Chronicles, p. 381. A final compelling motive was “a great hope and inward zeal they had of laying some good foundation, or at least to make some way thereunto, for ye propagating and advancing of the Gospel of the kingdom of Christ in those remote parts of ye world; yea, though they should be but even as stepping-stones unto others for ye performing of so great a work.” Bradford, History, p. 32. Dr. Usher (p. 44) takes no note of this strong missionary impulse, and he introduces motives for removal — e.g., “active controversy as to the validity of their own fundamental conclusions” — of which neither Bradford nor Winslow says anything. Nay, this is the very libel against which Winslow wrote to protest. Young's Chronicles, p. 380.

37 Winslow says, “We only going aboard” i.e., those about to sail. Young's Chronicles, p. 384.

38 “But take notice—the difference of number was not great.” Winslow, Young's Chronicles, p. 384.

39 He was buried in St. Peter's on March 4, many university professors and other eminent citizens being present. The church register shows that nine florins were paid for opening the grave. This sum was customary “for burials between the ordinary hours of 12 M. and 1.30 P.M.” See Dexter, E. H. P., p. 592. But cf. Collections of the Massachusetts Historical Society, 3d series. Vol. IX, 1846. Memoirs of the Pilgrims of New England, pp. 55, 56, by George Sumner.

40 Letter of Thomas Blossom to Governor Bradford, Leyden, December 15, 1625. Young's Chronicles, pp. 480–483.

41 Of Robinson's six children (John, Bridget, Isaac, Mercey, Fear, and James), one was buried in St. Peter's, Leyden, on February 7, 1621, and another on March 27, 1623, which of them, does not appear. Bridget was married at Leyden in May, 1629, to John Grynwich, student of theology, and her mother attended as a witness. Isaac went to New England in 1631, and was still living in 1702 — aged 92. Mrs. Robinson “is recorded as in Leyden as late as April 6, 1646, and Hoornbeeck states that she and her children, “joined the Dutch church.” E. H. P., pp. 591. 592 and Arber, p. 160. There is no good foundation for the Robinson New England pedigree as made out by Dr. Allen. Vol. I, pp. lxxv ff., Ashton. Mrs. Robinson's will, dated Leyden, 1692, has been found.

42 Young's Chronicles, Winslow's Brief Narration, p. 397.

43 The treatise was found in his study after his death, and held back for ten years because it was perceived that “some, though not many, were contrary-minded to the author's judgment.” Then it was published in hope of staying the mischief wrought in the church by four or five men, particularly one, whose obstinate insistence on the same narrow course as Robinson condemned had recently rent the church and even reduced it to a fifth of its former numerical strength. The church still lingered in 1639 and even in 1647. Dexter, E. H. P., p. 593, note. But its members were all gradually absorbed by the Dutch churches or dispersed.

44 Italics mine.

45 Cf. p. 193, “So far as they [the Pilgrims] could discover after 1630, there was not in all England one man of real ability who believed as they did, nor were there any laymen of real ability who came to Plymouth in any number to strengthen the Pilgrim State.”

46 Not 1626 or 1627—“This year (1628) Mr. Allerton brought over a young man for a minister to the people here, whether upon his own head or at the motion of some friends there” (italics mine) “I well know not, but was without the Church's sending. … His name was Mr. Rogers, but they perceived upon some trial that he was crazed in his brain. Mr. Allerton was much blamed.” History, p. 292.

47 Thus, we are told that “we have comparatively few reliable indications” of “Pilgrim belief aside from church government” (p. 93), although we know that their theology was Calvinistic, and that they “assented wholly to the 39 Articles and no less to the public confession of Faith put forth by the French Reformed Churches,” see Arber, pp. 289, 294. Stranger still, we are told that “we have no authentic hint” as to whether they knelt to receive (the Lord's Supper) “or sat” (p. 197); although the idea of them kneeling is unthinkable.

48 Young's Chronicles, Winslow's Brief Narrative, p. 398 and note.

49 History, pp. 317, 318.

50 For particulars, see Dexter, C., p. 416.

51 So W. Rathband in his Briefe Narration of Some Church Courses. This was said to him by Mr. W(inslow)?, an eminent man in the church at Plymouth in 1644, and is repeated by Robert Baillie in A Dissuasive from the Errours of the Time, 1645 (p. 54).

52 The Plymouth church, e.g., had no “teacher” and its idea of what belonged to the function of ruling elder was different.

53 Perhaps the most striking instance of this is John Cotton who before leaving old Boston heard with “grief” and “wonder” of the Puritan decline to Separatist ways n New England, but took to them himself when be got there in 1633. Dexter, C., p. 422.

54 Young's Chronicles, Governor Bradford's Dialogue, p. 426.

55 He was more than a ruling elder in the presbyterian sense: “it being a profound principle of this Church, in their first formation … to choose none for ruling elders but such as were able to teach; which ability (as Mr. Robinson observes in one of his letters) other reformed churches did not require in their ruling elders.” An Account of the Church of Christ in Plymouth, by John Cotton, p. 49. Cushman had held office for forty-two years and had been practically pastor for ten or more.

56 During the first two generations probably not at all.

57 There were no Quakers in New England before 1656. The first move toward persecution sprang from the General Court of Massachusetts. At its instance the Commissioners of the United Colonies issued circular letters to the General Court of each colony recommending certain action. Thus in 1658 it was recommended that “members of this cursed sect,” “male or female,” (1) should be banished under pain of severe corporal punishment; (2) should be punished accordingly if they returned and be banished again, under pain of death; (3) should accordingly suffer death if still they came back — “except they do then and there plainly and publicly renounce their said cursed opinions and devilish tenets.” All the colonies agreed, including Plymouth. But in the Plymouth Colony, Thomas Hatherly, Captain Cudworth, Isaac Robinson, and some others suffered disfranchisement or “their place in the Government,” sooner than consent. Deprived of its nobler element the Court of Plymouth colony passed many laws of great severity but none involving the death penalty. See History of Scituate, pp. 47–57, by Samuel Deane, Boston, 1831.

58 At this time (1656) he was forty-six years of age and had been twenty-five years in the colony.