I apologize for flinging around what one could perceive as irrelevant comments. I still wonder why we need to make this personal and whether my invocation of what you perceive to be irrelevant facts justifies personal attacks. Regardles, the facts are these:  

 :*1. The hits last month of articles on the disamb page to articles other than John Leland (antiquarian) together add up to more than the hits to the antiquary article. If you do not include hits to John Leland Center for Theological Studies (though WP:PRIME is silent on this), the combined hits of the non-antiquary articles do not exceed the antiquary hits. I do not think we can be sure that "the article on the Center will never be called simple John Leland" by a person searching for it, but I cannot think of a way to prove it either way. 

 :*2. If you go back to February, the hits are as follows - 762, antiquary (with 23 of those coming from the Leyland redirect); 177, journalist; 507, Baptist; 80, Presbyterian; 268, the Center. Even if you do not subtract the 23 hits that came from the Leyland redirect and do not count any hits to the Center, the non-antiquary hits are still greater (if barely) than the antiquary hits.  

 :*3. The antiquary is the number one result in a Google books search.  

 :*4. The journalist is the number one result in a Google news search.  

 :*5. The Baptist appears most often and higher-up in a Google web search on the first page.   

 :*6. Since last month, you deleted the listing for John Leland (MP) (despite several articles having redlinks to the same). I created that article and returned it to the disamb page. I noted that I do not anticipate that this article would receive a huge number of hits, but it will be more than zero, thus increasing the disparity between the total hits to non-antiquary articles and the hits to the antiquary article in some months, or closing the gap between the other individuals named John Leland and the antiquary in other months (if one chooses not to count hits to the Center or the other "see alsos").  

 :*7. In the last few days, I expanded the journalist article just a bit, added many proper wikilinks pointing to the article, and added some categories. I would expect this stub to get more hits in the future as a result. The journalist/author is quite notable, and increasingly so.  

 :*8. I also added listings for two other individuals for whom John Leland makes up their first and middle names; I would not weigh that heavily in the analysis. 

 Together, placing most weight on Nos. 1-5 above as seems proper to me per WP:PRIME, I think these weigh in favor of keeping John Leland as the disambiguation page. I do not think John Leland (antiquary) is "more likely than all the others combined – to be the subject being sought when a reader clicks the 'Go' button" after typing John Leland, especially going forward.