8Gg koornhert, 
out to him more than once, “ We will not fuffer you to 
harangue thus •” to which he replied, “ Nor will I fuffer 
any man to lord it over my faith.” He alfo fubjoined, to 
one of his opponents, “ I do not pretend to govern any 
man’s faith, but I am ready to bear with you, and all others, 
who differ in opinion from me. Why fhould they not 
then bear with me ? Were I to be an enemy to all fuch 
as think Gtherwife than I do, who is there to whom I 
fhould not be an adverfary ? Can you find ten men in 
>one town that believe alike in all things ?” He then took 
his leave of them, declaring that he would no longer ar¬ 
gue in the prefence of men who would not allow him the 
-freedom of replying to liis opponents. 
After the meeting had broken up, the ffates, on the 
--pretence of preventing further quarrels, ordered him, by 
■the magiftrates of Haeriem, “not to publifh any thing in 
print concerning the difpute.” He was alfo forbidden 
“ to trouble the minifters of Delft with letters, or other- 
wife, upon pain of the utmoit feverity.” Some time af¬ 
ter this, various minifters in different towns of Holland 
directed theirattacks againft Koornhert in the pulpit, rail- 
ting at him by name, and reprefenting him as a heretic, 
an impious fellow, and a free-thinker. Upon which he 
petitioned the ftates, and humbly prayed that he might 
be heard, not doubting but that he fhould prove his in¬ 
nocence ; hoping that they would filence fuch fcandalous 
tongues. If he could not obtain that favour, nor enjoy 
the liberty of his confcience, and the protection of juftice, 
he befought them to permit him to go and live out of 
-their dominions. In the year 1579, when the difputes 
took place between the reformed minifters at Leyden, re¬ 
lating to the powers of confiftories, which laid the foun¬ 
dation of the controverfies which afterwards fprung up 
refpeCting the office and authority of a Chriftian govern¬ 
ment in ecclefiaftical matters, Koornhert drew up the 
Apology of the magiftrates of Leyden for their proceed¬ 
ings, in oppofition to the affumed power of the confiftory ; 
in which the independent principle was maintained, “ that 
Jefus Chrift alone was to rule his own church, and not 
minifters and confiftories, left they fhould again eredt them- 
felves into heads of the church, and aim at dominion over 
confidences; which would be bringing this free church 
■ under the yoke of a new papacy.” 
From this time we learn nothing of Koornhert till the 
year 1582, when he difcovered his fidelity to his country, 
by proving the means of defeating a plan for the furprife 
of Enkhuifen. He likewife fliowed liimfelf the conlift- 
ent advocate for liberty of confcience, when, in the fame 
year, the ftates of Holland prohibited the Roman catho¬ 
lics the exercife of their religion, on pain of being pu- 
jiifhed as ditturbers of the public tranquillity. O11 this 
occafion, he drew up a petition to the prince of Orange, 
at the requeft of fomeof the principal inhabitants of Haer¬ 
iem who profeffed the Romifti religion, for protection in 
the exercife of it in the convents, and one church which 
had been given up by the reformed. The magiftrates of 
the town, having received information that he had drawn 
tip fuch a petition, fummoned him before them, and de¬ 
manded it of him. Upon this he delivered it up, and at 
the fame time told them, “ that he did not pretend to juf- 
tify all the allegations in it, and much lefs the Romifti re¬ 
ligion, which he looked upon to be falfe, and their church 
a neft of murderers; but he thought, however, that the 
papifts had been wronged, both by the violation of pro- 
mifes, and the force offered to their confidences.” In the 
following year, he again took up his pen in theological 
and ecclefiaftical controverfy, by writing a little treatife, 
which he entitled “A Trial againft the Netherland Cate- 
chifm,” which he dedicated to the ftates of Holland. Its 
defign was to defend the grand principle of liberty of 
confcience againft the attempt which was making, by the 
. impolition of that catechifm, to the exclufionof all others, 
to introduce an intolerable tyranny and defpotifm in reli¬ 
gious and ecclefiaftical matters. In the dedication, he 
plates that he had fat Bill, waiting with patience ever fince 
the year 1579, to fee what would be the effefts of the 
clergy’s proceedings; and now he found that their only 
aim was to lord it over all others in matters of faith ; 
fince they openly and in print declared, “ that a liberty to 
every man to believe as he pleafed was difagreeable to 
them.” He, therefore, offered them this little trafl, in 
the hope that they would not proceed to a definitive judg¬ 
ment refgefting the adoption of that catechifm, before 
they had 'fully heard the other party, of which he owned 
himfelf to be againft it, and againft all fuch as pretended 
to juftify it. In oppofition to this piece, the clergy pre- 
fer.ted a memorial to the ftates, complaining of Koornhert 
and his proceedings, and defiring that they might he heard 
againft him. Afterfome confultation, the ftates refolved, 
with the confent of the prince of Orange, to fummon the 
minifters and Koornhert to the Hague, that they might 
hear what they bad jo advance againft each other; and 
appointed a deputation to prefide at their debates. Thefe 
extended to fuch an extreme length on the firft article con- 
tefted, which was but one out of fifty felefted for difcuf- 
fion, that the patience of the ftates was exhaufted, and 
they ordered that the debate fhould be clofed. Koorn¬ 
hert, however, fays that the minifters failed on their fide, 
leaving his laft paper unanfvvered, and fo breaking up the 
conference. 
In the year 1589, the celebrated Juftus Lipfius, profef- 
for of hiftory at Leyden, publifhed a treatife on civil go¬ 
vernment, in which, when difcourfing concerning reli¬ 
gion, he maintained, that but one kind of religion ought 
to be tolerated in the fame country ; and that any perfons 
entertaining heterodox opinions of God, and of the efta- 
blifhed church, and endeavouring to bring others over to 
their party, efpecially if they created difturbances in the 
ftate, ought to be puniftied. “Mercy,” fays he, “ has no 
place here : caufticsand amputations muft be made ufe of, 
it being better that one limb fhould perifli than the whole 
body.” Koornhert, the fworn enemy of this -flagitious 
doftrine, and of all force upon confcience, oppofed this 
book of Lipfius ; and, after having exchanged feveral let- 
lers with him and others, followed the blow, by publifh- 
ing his treatife, entitled, “The Procefs, or Trial, of He¬ 
retic-killing, and Force upon Confcience ;” dedicating it 
to the magiftrates of Leyden. He likewife fent his book 
to the magiftrates of other towns in Holland, warning 
them againft thefe principles of Lipfius. The magiftrates 
of Leyden, in order to gratify Lipfius, gave notice offici- 
alty, that they did not accept of tile dedication ; and that 
Koornhert had by it done them neither honour nor fer- 
vice. However, they did not prohibit the book from be¬ 
ing read by the burghers; but at the fame time exhorted 
them to read a Latin anfwer to it by Lipfius, entitled, 
“ The Only Religion, againft the Dialogue-Maker.” 
Koornhert was now attacked by his laft illnefs; but even 
on his fick bed continued his exertions in the caufeof li¬ 
berty and humanity, by finifhing his “ Defence of his 
Trial of Heretic-killing,” which was afterwards publifh¬ 
ed by his heirs. He died at Gouda, in 1590, in the fixty- 
eighth year of his age. Grotius exprefied a high efteem 
for his labours, and a hope, that his judicious works 
would not prove unprofitable in bringing over to peace¬ 
ful counfels fome of thofe who were not too much preju¬ 
diced, and in promoting thofe things in which the reli¬ 
gion of Chriftians does properly confift. Pontanus clafies 
him among the learned men of the city of Amfterdam, 
and praifes his love of piety and truth. Hadrian Junius, 
in his defcription of Holland, calls him a man of divine 
underftanding; but adds, that fortune was his enemy. 
He thinks that he fuft’ered himfelf to be made ufe of by- 
God, “as a voluntary demolifher of the murthering pri- 
fon of confidences.” By fome he has been called the Cato 
of the reformation, as he endeavoured, with indefatigable 
zeal, to cenfure and amend whatever he found amifs, with¬ 
out refpett of perfons. An edition of all his works was 
publifhed in 1630, in three vols. folio. Bayle. Brand's .Hi/l. 
Reform. Gen. Biog. 
j KOO'RQ^ 
