USA > New York > Ecclesiastical records, state of New York, Volume IV > Part 82
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27 | Part 28 | Part 29 | Part 30 | Part 31 | Part 32 | Part 33 | Part 34 | Part 35 | Part 36 | Part 37 | Part 38 | Part 39 | Part 40 | Part 41 | Part 42 | Part 43 | Part 44 | Part 45 | Part 46 | Part 47 | Part 48 | Part 49 | Part 50 | Part 51 | Part 52 | Part 53 | Part 54 | Part 55 | Part 56 | Part 57 | Part 58 | Part 59 | Part 60 | Part 61 | Part 62 | Part 63 | Part 64 | Part 65 | Part 66 | Part 67 | Part 68 | Part 69 | Part 70 | Part 71 | Part 72 | Part 73 | Part 74 | Part 75 | Part 76 | Part 77 | Part 78 | Part 79 | Part 80 | Part 81 | Part 82 | Part 83 | Part 84 | Part 85 | Part 86 | Part 87 | Part 88 | Part 89 | Part 90 | Part 91 | Part 92
Rev. Sirs, Much-esteemed and Beloved Brethren, Your Rever- ences' Servants to command, the Members of the Classis of Amsterdam, In the Name of all,
B. Brouwer, Depp. Cl. p. t. Praeses.
M. Schnetlage, Depp. Cl. p. t. Scriba.
Amsterdam, May 5, 1749.
3068
1749
ECCLESIASTICAL RECORDS
CLASSIS OF AMSTERDAM.
Acts of the Deputies and their Correspondence.
The Classis of Amsterdam to Rev. Theodore Frelinghuysen, May
5, 1749, Vol. 30, page 146, No. 89.
Reverend Sir and Brother :- We were very glad to learn from your letter of July 11th 1748 of your safe arrival in your field of labor, the extent and interested condition of the Church and your anxiety to instruct it and build it up. May the Lord grant unto you more abundantly of his grace, assist and bless you in your labors unto his own glory and the salvation of souls.
We are delighted that you intend to unite with the Coetus. We not only urge you to persevere in this, but trust that you will also seek to induce your worthy Consistory to do the same. Impress upon them the fact that the holding of a Coetus will not infringe upon their liberties but will rather establish them; and that such a body, with the Lord's blessing will tend to prevent disorders and con- fusion, which entire independence or congregationalism may give rise to.
Classis would gladly have seen your Catechism previous to its publication, that we might have examined and approved it. But for the reasons that you mention, we will now, in our good will, permit it to be examined, and if nothing be found therein to forbid publication, to be approved by the Coetus, in the name of the Classis; but this permission must not be taken as a precedent.
We notice, in your letter of Aug. 15, 1748, with great satisfaction, the excellent, and very commendable reports respecting Mr. Samuel Verbryck; but the way in which you request Classis to order the examination and promotion of that gentle- man, and the arguments you use to strengthen your request, appear doubtful to us. Classis will yet this once permit an examination in the case of this gentle- man, by the Rev. Coetus, in its name; but it is clearly seen already, from your letter, what the consequences would be, if such permissions were granted more frequently. It is, therefore, our intention, not readily to grant such requests again.
And now we commend you to God and the word of his grace, etc., etc.
In the Name of the Classis of Amsterdam,
B. Brouwer, Depp. Classis, p. t. Praeses. M. Schnetlage, Depp. Cl. p. t. Scriba.
Amsterdam, May 5. 1749.
CLASSIS OF AMSTERDAM.
Acts of the Deputies and their Correspondence.
The Classis of Amsterdam to the Rev. G. Haeghoort, May 5, 1749. Vol. 30, page 149, No. 91.
To Rev. Mr. Haegoort of Second River.
Rev. Sir and Much-esteemed Brother :- We can reply briefly to your letter of Nov. 10, 1748, inasmuch as with reference to many matters mentioned therein, we have already written to the Rev. Coetus. This body has been requested, if pos- sible, to settle the Tappan case. In regard to Mr. Fryenmoet, we gave Rev. Mancius and others liberty to advance him. The business was not, however, carried out just according to the intentions of Classis; nevertheless we have approved it, or at least acquiesced in it, from indulgence, and because the matter when once accomplished could not very well be repeated. The baptisms admin- istered by Rev. Fryenmoet before his ordination, the Classis has declared illegal, and therefore void.
OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK.
3069 1749
In regard to your inclination to go to Pennsylvania, we see no good reason for permitting it. We advise you to remain with your congregation, and labor thereln, with God's help, until a lawful call to another place may come to you in the power of God. Who knows how much good you may yet do in your present field under the power of divine grace. We will write to your congregation that they treat you properly according to their obligations. We commend you to God, and wish you and all who are dear to you abundant blessing and grace from the fullness of our Divine Savior.
Your Revs. etc., etc. In Name of Classis,
B. Brouwer, Depp. Cl. p. t. Praeses. M. Schnetlage, Depp. Cl. p. t. Scriba.
Amsterdam, May 5, 1749.
CLASSIS OF AMSTERDAM.
Acts of the Deputies and their Correspondence.
The Classis of Amsterdam to Rev. G. Du Bois, May 5th, 1749. Vol. 30, page 151, No. 93.
To Rev. Mr. Du Bols at New York.
Rev. Sir and Highly-esteemed Brother :- If you were pleased to consider the letter privately addressed to you by the Deputies of the Classis as a proof of our affection and esteem for you, let this one also serve as an evidence of the same, although the multiplicity of our affairs and the shortness of our time compell us to be brief. The irregularitles and disturbances in your country are painful not only to you, but to us also, and for many reasons. We hope to be instrumental in removing them, and trust our endeavors thereto may be owned by the God of order, peace and love. Your letters greatly please us. We are rejoiced that at your great age, you retain through the Lord's mercy so much spirit and power to labor in the Word of the Lord, that until recently you preached twice a day. Worthy father, may the Lord yet cause you to bear much fruit in your old age. May He fill you with His spirit, and sustain and strengthen you by His hand and power. In His unbounded love may He quicken you, causing you to walk in the light of His countenance and in the consolation of His spirit, and that you may finish your course with joy. At last, like the righteous Simeon may you depart in peace, supported by the certain expectation of the reward of grace which is promised to the faithful servants of the Lord.
In the name of all, B. Brouwer, Depp. Cl. p. t. Praeses. M. Schnetlage, Depp. Cl. p. t. Scriba.
Amsterdam,
May 5, 1747.
CLASSIS OF AMSTERDAM.
Acts of the Deputies and their Correspondence.
May 5, 1749. To the Consistory of Kingston and Rev. G. W. Mancius.
Rev., Very Learned Gentlemen, and Much-esteemed Brethren :- In reply to yours, written Jan. 4th 1747, and despatched in July, 1748, we reply, that we are astonished at the reflectlons you make upon the examination and qualification of Rev. Fryenmoet. We think that it is clear from our former letter, that the thing took place contrary to our intention although we kindly approved of it, and that the affair of Rev. Bohm Is of a different character.
3070
ECCLESIASTICAL RECORDS
1749
The Classis is sorry that you do not favor the Coetus, but decide against it. Also that Rev. Mancius makes objections to allowing Rev. Leigh (Leydt) to preach, although he has been examined and qualified by the Coetus in the name of the Classis. We can see nothing but evil consequences from such conduct.
We do not wish to deny that there may come up matters for consideration in the Coetus, which may create trouble, but since the Classis intends to use all fore- sight and prudence in the arrangement, it seems plain that your apprehensions are exaggerated. The failure to have a Coetus, may, in our judgement, occasion disturbance, and favor Congregationalism. (Indepentismus.) If you persist in dis- approving of a Coetus, and in expressing your opposition thereto, the Classis can- not promise you that it will retain its hearty good-will to correspond with you, and to assist you, according to ability, with counsel and deeds, in brotherly love. For it perceives your unwillingness to take its counsel in a matter, which, from its very nature, proves that the Classis determined upon it, with the single desire to promote the welfare of the Church in your country. (Referring to the establish- ment of a Coetus.) With this declaration, we request you again, in a friendly and brotherly manner, to receive our counsel and suggestions. Thus will you show your willingness to be subordinate to Classis, according to the professions of esteem which you are pleased to make. We hope that this may be the case, and we will rejoice to be so informed. We pray that the God of grace, from the fulness of his Son, may pour out upon you abundantly of his grace and love and Spirit, as well as upon your labors, and upon all who are dear to you.
Amsterdam, May 5, 1749.
(Signed as above.)
CLASSIS OF AMSTERDAM.
Acts of the Deputies and their Correspondence.
The Classis of Amsterdam to the Church of Second River, (Belle- ville), May 5, 1749, Vol. 30, page 150. No. 92. To the Congregation at Second River.
Worthy and Respected Friends :- We send this letter in love, having assumed the office of an advocate toward you in behalf of our esteemed brother, your pastor, Rev. G. Haeghoort. We can do this the more confidently and earnestly, because. while he labors among you faithfully and through the Lord's blessing not without fruit, we have learned that he has more than once declined a call for your sake. The laborer, you know, is worthy of his hire; and, thou shalt not muzzle the ox that treadeth out the corn. You are aware what the law has reference to. Ought it not generally and in love to be obeyed? Ought you to suffer your pastor to be disheartened, and to lack the necessaries of life? Is it possible that you will not grant him the repairs needed for his house? Must he suffer the lack of fire-wood, and ought he not to be paid his salary pleasantly? It is disagreeable to us to mention such things, and we fear it is equally annoying to you. Let then your love take all such unpleasant things out of the way. Receive our reminder in love and friendship. Gratify us by acting in this business and in everything that your pastor may be encouraged and incited to serve you with greater zeal and cheer- fulness.
We commend both you and him to the Lord. We trust he may be a blessed instrumentality in the Lord's hands to the salvation of many souls.
Signed as above.
Amsterdam, May 5, 1749.
1740
3071
OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK.
CLASSIS OF AMSTERDAM.
Acts of the Deputies.
Letters to Foreign Lands.
1749, May (62) At the meeting of Classis in May, 1749, letters were read as follows: One to Rev. Ritzema, of New York and to the Consistory of ; to Rev. de Ronde; to the Church of Queens County; to Rev. Boel, of New York; to the Consistory of Newtown; to Rev. Muzelius, at Tappan; to the church there; to the Coetus of New York; to Rev. Frielinghuy- sen at Albany; to the Consistory of Kingston; to Rev. Haeghoort; to the Church of Second River; to Rev. Du Bois, of New York; all of which are to be found in the Copy Book, (Vol. 30.)
At the Classis of June, 1749, a letter was read to the Coetus of Pennsylvania; also one to Rev. Bohm; to be found as above. Acts of Deputies, xxiii. 18.
CLASSIS OF AMSTERDAM.
Acts of the Deputies, May? 1749? xxiii. 125-6, xxiii. 128.
Letter from G. Hagoort, J. H. Goetschius, (committee on Muze- lius case), dated Nov. 8, 1748, with some addenda.
These two gentlemen, as President and Clerk of the Committee, confirm the mis- behavior and obstinacy of Rev. Muzelius, in refusing to appear before the Com- mittee, or to reply to the accusations sent to him in writing; although they and their consistories had been at Tappan twice on this affair. They had, therefore. unanimously suspended him from his office, asking us, and leaving us to decide what is to be further done in this case.
For the further eludication and justification of that action, we have sent over the following papers:
1. A declaration under oath, by several witnesses, made before the justice of the peace, Abraham Harm, who testify to the habitual drunkenness of Rev. Muzelius as well as his wife; but mostly of the man, who also makes himself odious by cursing and swearing.
Yea, that once on a Monday, after he had on Sunday evening distributed (the elements?), he was seen in a tap-house with a company playing at bowling, and drinking punch.
2. A copy of a letter written by the Committee to Rev. Muzelius, with a state- ment of the grievances brought against him, and the request to him to answer them.
3. A copy of the accusations brought against Rev. Muzelius by the consistory, in regard to the neglect of his office, and his evil conduct in respect to one John Fisher.
3072
ECCLESIASTICAL RECORDS
1749
4. A declaration by many of the members at Tappan, testifying over their signatures, that they were in no way induced by the elder, J. Blauwvelt, to com- plain against Rev. Muzelius. To this is added still another complaint against him made to the Committee, besides drunkenness and his neglect of duty, namely, his further misbehaviour in reference to housekeeping.
5. A copy of the sentence of suspension, by the Committee, of Rev. Muzelius, until the time that the Classis of Amsterdam should have given final decision on the case. This was made known to him by two deacons. xxiii. 125, 126.
Letter from the Consistory of Kingston, dated July 20, 1747.
This letter which was not sent till July 1748, and was signed by G. W. Mancius (as President) agrees substantially with his previous one, No. 38. xxiii. 128.
CLASSIS OF AMSTERDAM.
Acts of the Deputies. xxiii. 128-9.
Letter from the Church of Jamaica, (by the Arondeus faction) dated Jan. 7, 1749?
1. They thank us for the trouble we took in the case of Goetschius; and for the advice given them regarding the appointment of a (new) consistory, and then (for that consistory) to look out for a capable and wide-awake minister; also for show- ing how consistory could be installed by a neighboring minister, or by a member of the Committee chosen by us, or by some one sent by the Coetus.
2. They state that they had chosen a (new) consistory by all those who had previously acted as elders or deacons; which consistory was installed by Rev. Arondeus.
3. They relate that some, (by far the fewest,) made trouble; and that they, by the advice of Rev. Ritzema, elected another consistory, and even published it. This, however, they declared, (with submission to our judgment,) unlawful, as conflicting with our advice, and the order of Coetus. On this account they had made fruitless representations to Ritzema, who pretended to be in doubt whether Arondeus was a lawful minister; but the contrary (of this doubt) they maintain, with great praise for Arondeus.
4. That Rev. Ritzema had gone on with the election, although they proposed to postpone the election for six months; and, in the meantime, seek to persuade all to love their opponents. They represent themselves as being " New Lights " .. Yea, they also consulted with Rev. Du Bois, at that time, from whom they also send over a letter.
Nota Bene. This letter advises the election of one elder and one deacon, who had already officiated as elder and deacon, with the added request to make known their sentiment on this matter to the committee; so that, with their approval, Rev. Du Bois might appoint a time to carry out this work, in love. But it does not appear that this point was given heed to by these people.
5. They mention also that they have frequently invited their opponents to send over to Classis to secure a preacher. But this they likewise refuse. (See request hereupon). They also appeal to them to report what was necessary for the up- building of the church, to prevent its ruin. They conclude with a wish for a blessing.
6. To this is still added a Postscript which those same people signed that day, and in which they mention
(1) That their opponents have rejected the requesting of a minister from the Classis, with the remark, that from the Classis come none but evil-minded men, none but the scum of the sea and chaff. This was heard by the elder De Amer- man (Amerman?) the precentor, and by several members. If need be, would con- firm it under oath.
3073
OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK.
1749
(2) That Goetschius having been advanced (ordained) by the Coetus, as minister at Hackensack, has now no services to conduct in their church; but nevertheless he caused much confusion there, by means of evil counselors, and still seeks to do evil.
Nota Bene. There is added in a note: Some of the Coetus are active to return Goetschius here by trickery, in order to please our opponents with political views. (?)
Signed, Jamaica, January 7. John Nostrand, Abraham Polhemus, Dominicus Ditmars, Dirk Amerman. xxiii. 128, 129.
CLASSIS OF AMSTERDAM.
Acts of the Deputies, 1749. (May?) xxiii. 129-132.
Letter from Long Island, signed by seven persons (of the Aron- deus faction). Jan. 10, 1749.
This letter embraces two important documents.
I. A reply to certain accusations brought against Rev. Arondeus. These, it is said, were procured by four of the most seditious and evil-speaking persons. with the object, if Arondeus were again called, and should live in their part of the country, to bounce him out, by seditious means, or (to get) Classis (to do it); so that thus the smaller party might have hope of ruling both in church and civil affairs.
This accusation, as made up, they had caused to be signed by as many hands as possible, and in doing this, this plan was pursued: When they came to a house where lived some one who was friendly to Arondeus, the letter was not allowed to be read, even though it were requested. In other cases, the promise to sign was required before the letter was allowed to be read. Thereby the accusations were elicited, and include the following:
1. Arondeus spoke of a voice (speech) of God coming to him in the night. His reply was: That his contract with the church having expired, he was solicited to remain indefinitely; that thereupon on a certain night he had fallen upon his knees to pray. After his prayer it seemed to him that the ground beneath him moved, and from this he concluded it was best for him, and also God's will, that he should go to Albany, where he had been called.
2. Arondeus celebrated the Supper without reading the Form. Answer: This was done only on short and rainy days with the approval of one or two elders; and for the benefit of such as, after the second service, had very far to ride to get home.
3. Public Censuring. Answer: This was done because they did not pay their bills, and there was no other means of maintaining the truth of that fact; for it was said that the Consistory had lied about it.
4. Not installing Van Sinderen, with a regular installation sermon. Answer: He and his party were the cause of this. Arondeus had offered to preach such a sermon, or to have Rev. du Bois invited to do so. This was refused.
5. The passing by of houses in house-visitation. Answer: This was done by resolution of Consistory; the reasons for which are subjoined.
6. Arondeus has cut off Gravesend (from services). Answer: The contrary shall presently appear.
II. Accusations brought in against Van Sinderen.
1. That on his arrival, he delayed, yea, refused, to call on Arondeus, although frequently requested by the Elders; but finally, upon their strong insistence, came back and went to him.
2. Van Sinderen had said in Consistory, in reference to his request as to the turns in preaching, I have heard much evil about you, and will hold it as true if I preach in the fore noon. Z. O. (?)
3074
ECCLESIASTICAL RECORDS
1749
3. He has obstinately refused to come, if he had to ride along with Arondeus. He gave Arondeus no opportunity to baptize a child, while he was present in the church. Of this, various explanations were afterwards given. In some of these it was stoutly denied that Arondeus was in the church, but that he had gone home with bad company, thus giving great offence.
4. When Arondeus had been called to Raritan and had gone there, the principal people of the church (on Long Island) made out a new call on Arondeus. This he declined thirteen times in thirteen months, but finally accepted it, the four- teenth time. Thereupon he offered, in writing, to be reconciled with Van Sinderen, but the latter rejected it, constantly making injurious reflections on Arondeus from the pulpit.
5. Van Sinderen demanded for his voyage seven months' salary and ninety-nine pounds, New York money, for expenses; thus altogether, one hundred and sixty one pounds, sixteen shillings and five pence; while Arondeus for such a voyage, asked only thirty-one pounds.
6. Van Sinderen absents himself from Consistory. By keeping away he re- fuses pr. plura (?) to conclude any business. He said, indeed, once, this is fool's (hagelsch) work; I think myself better than all you.
7. That Van Sinderen said once at the afternoon sermon, that he had studied this out between the two services .- Usually he is out (away from home) four or five days in the week. Yea, even on Saturdays, before Communion, he appears as much as twice in the village. Thereby some, being offended, remain away.
8. He taught that mutual reconciliation is not necessary before Communion; or he assumed to remove that scruple by himself administering the Communion to people who lived in the midst of wilful slanders. This he did under the pretence - I am the Master of that Bread and Wine. He used also still other expressions, both in and out of the pulpit, that are unseemly. The putting off of the installa- tion of the elders upon ridiculous complaints; the refusing to be reconciled with Arondeus, and yet partaking of the Supper; and eight instances more are given.
All this is confirmed by the signatures of certain Magistrates, under oath. They testify that not one, or only some, but all of these things, even to the least, are established, under oath.
Done on Long Island and confirmed at their meeting, January 10th, 1749.
Signed, John Lott, Leffert Leffertse, Folkert Folkertse, John Ditmars, Rem. Remsen, Nicholas van Dent, Abraham Blom.
After this there follows on the folded leaf, a letter from the ruling elders of the congregations named below, dated January 15, 1745 (?) in which they
I. Declare: That the dissensions have reached the highest point; and that they look forward with anxiety as to how, and when, any better condition of affairs can be brought about.
II. That they had sometimes thought, according to English law, it were best, (if we approved) that each minister should continue with his own party, and exer- else his zeal according to his own best gifts; yet thereby enmity would be fostered. People would meet each other, riding on the road to church, with bitterness. Then also no fellowship could be held, and in every house dissensions would abide.
III. For these reasons, they requested that we would cause one of the minis- ters to look about for another call, as was done in the case of Goetschius. They add, however, that there is salary enough for two Arondeuses, but not for one Van Sinderen. Finally they submit themselves to God's will, through whom we rule. Signed by the elders of Five localities:
Of Breukelen: Rem Remsen, Jacob Remsen, Jurie Brown, Tunis Bogert.
Of Flatbush: Dominicus Deivos (Debevoise?), Philip Nagels, John Wodrom (Waldron?).
Of Utrecht: Rutger Van Brunt, Henry Janssen, Rutger Van Brunt (Jr .? ).
Of Bay (or Flatlands): Roelof voorHees, John Lott.
Of Bushwick: Nicholas Volkertse, Jonas Van Aalst.
Vol. xxiii. 129-132.
OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK.
3075 1749
CLASSIS OF AMSTERDAM.
Correspondence from America. Certain Elders and Magistrates of Queens County, Long Island, to the Classis of Amsterdam, May 10, 1749. Portfolio, " New York ", Vol. ii.
Much respected Sirs, Fathers and Brethren in Christ Jesus :- Since we have been annoyed by a fresh oppression of the Seetus, (Coetus), we know of no other expedient, at present, than to take refuge with your Revs.
The said Coetus wants to arrogate to itself the power to settle ministers over churches, without election by the Elders and with no regard to the pleasure of the greater number in the church, who have to raise the salary; and even over churches which were compelled to declare, publicly and earnestly, that it was not possible for them to be in correspondence with it. As to its party-spirit, which is already in evidence, the following may serve: The Coetus wanted to settle two ministers in Kings and Queens Counties, respectively, when they had secured the consent of only one third of the members of the congregations. The other two-thirds would then have been obliged to submit. But the latter will never thus submit. For this reason those of Kings County have again called and obtained, Rev. A. D. (Arondeus). Other weighty reasons have been mentioned in our former letter.
Now some members of the Coetus are saying everywhere, that " Rev. A. D. is on Long Island in an illegal way, because he was not settled there by our Coetus." This has raised a serious question in the churches, especially because the Rev. Van Sinderen, during the first six months, week after week publicly proclaimed from the pulpit that A. D. was unlawfully there; and that, therefore, all his bap- tizings and marryings had no more legality than if a negro had done them; that according to John 10 : 1, he is a thief and a murderer (?); and that for his labors, there is no divine promise of blessing; but he is to be cast out as a false prophet, and to be trodden under foot as salt that has lost its savor, etc.
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.