USA > New York > Ecclesiastical records, state of New York, Volume V > Part 11
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
SESSION V .- FRIDAY, OCTOBER 18-FORENOON.
After devout prayer to God:
1. (Ad Sess. IV., 5.) Report of the Committee .- Dom. Frelinghuysen and Fryenmoet presented the draft they were directed to prepare, which was unanimously approved,
3188
ECCLESIASTICAL RECORDS
1751
and ordered to be signed by the President and Clerk, and sent to the Rev. Classis by the first opportunity. The committee were thanked for their care and pains.
2. Postponement of Arondeus's Defence .- Arondeus being present, was requested to make his defence against Van Sinderen and the congregations; but he complained of the imperfection of his copy of the charges; it was read over, compared with the original, and put in the desired form. But this took so much time that the defence was put off till the afternoon.
3. His answer to another charge .- It was testified that he said that the Rev. Coetus had wickedly deceived the Rev. Classis, and that he could prove that before the Assembly. He, in reply, admitted it, with this explanation: that the Coetus had persuaded the Rev. Classis that he had exercised his ministry on Long Island eight months before he received a call, and that his call was unlawful, whereas it was lawful.
SESSION VI .- AFTERNOON.
After prayer, the minutes were read, without remark, except as to the case of Bodet, which was taken ad referendum.
1. (Ad Sess. V. 2, II. 2, IV. 2.) Defence of Arondeus .- Arondeus was summoned to answer the protest against his new call in Kings County, especially the objections, to which he gave answer in detail.
(These objections and answers are given in such condensed terms, and refer to so many minute circumstances, that they could hardly be understood by the modern reader. They are therefore omitted from the translation.)
2. Reasons for his Call .- Being requested to give his reasons for the call upon him, he said; 1. Because Van Sinderen refused to serve the people. 2. The Classis desired it. 3. He himself desired it, and would become a member of the Coetus. 4. So many people were for him. 5. To do otherwise would cause greater trouble.
3. Charges against Van Sinderen .- Arondeus's people presented charges against Van Sinderen in two papers, he himself in one, on which both enlarged anew. These charges were now ordered to be read; but, being found to be unsigned, the parties were called in. Arondeus authenticated his in person, and Ph. Nagel signed the other. Dan Bodet also introduced and signed some before the Assembly. All these were read. Arondeus and friends were then asked if these charges had been before the Classis? Answer: Those contained in Arondeus's paper, except some not sworn to, which, however, are the heaviest. They were asked further, Is it your aim that Van Sinderen shall answer these before us? Answer: Yes; that the Coetus may see why we do not pay Van Sinderen, and why we are opposed to him.
4. Committee on the Whole Case .- Messrs. De Ronde and Frelinghuysen were appointed a committee to devise measures in respect to a call upon Arondeus, by which he should be rendered a fit person to receive such call. This committee's plan was approved, and submitted to Arondeus and his friends. He said that he would conform to it, if it were not to be sent to the Classis, because there was some accusations in it which he could not admit. When asked if he would conform, pro- vided it were not sent to the Classis, he said yes, and that he would do his utmost to carry it out. With this the Assembly was satisfied.
Separated with thanksgiving, to meet again on Monday afternoon, at three o'clock.
SESSION VII .- MONDAY, OCTOBER 21-AFTERNOON.
After earnest prayer to God, the minutes of the last session were read.
1. Parties Present .- Arondeus, Jacob Remsen, Ph. Nagel, Dan. Bodet, John Lott, being present, Dom. Van Sinderen was ordered to defend himself against their charges.
2. Quaeriturs Proposed .- Dom. Van Sinderen asked if matters which had been before the Classis must now again come up before the Coetus? Also, if matters which had been considered and decided by the Coetus must be overhauled again?
3. Dismissed .- These Quaeriturs were passed by, and the Assembly directed Dom. Van Sinderen to give his answer to-morrow, at nine.
The Assembly separated, with thanksgiving. The Tempus Conventius appointed at 9 A. M.
3189
OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK.
1751
SESSION VIII .- TUESDAY, OCTOBER 22-FORENOON.
After prayer to God, the minutes of the preceeding session were read and approved. 1. The defence of Dom. Sinderen and his congregation was heard.
(The original record gives this in detail, but the statements, inasmuch as they refer continually to documents not recorded, and not now extant, are even still less intelligible to modern readers than those in the defence of Arondeus, referred to on p. Ixiv. They are therefore for the same reason omitted here.)
SESSION IX .- AFTERNOON.
After prayer, the minutes were read and approved. The defence of Dom. Van Sinderen were continued.
1. (This section is omitted, for the reason mentioned above.) Assembly deliberated in the fear of the Lord, with great brotherly love and provident concern for the distracted Church of Kings County. Finally, the Rev. Messrs. Frelinghuysen and De Ronde were unanimously appointed a committee to prepare a second plan for the further action of the Assembly, in the case first of Van Sinderen, and then of both parties.
3. New Consistory to be chosen .- It was also determined that the ministers of the Coetus, and their respective elders, shall be deputed to preside over the confession- sermons (Belydenis predikatien) of Dom. Van Sinderen and Dom. Arondeus, in order at the same time to put a Consistory in each church, in this way: each party in every village in Kings County, save Gravesend, shall nominate eight of the most moderate and peaceful persons, from all of whom the committee shall choose eight- four elders and four deacons-an equal number for each party, whom, after being three times published, they shall ordain according to custom, when each has, under his own hand, submitted to the Coetus.
4. Reproof of the Disorderly .- Of the ministers, with their elders, appointed to hear the confessions of Van Sinderen and Arondeus, in the presence of the whole congre- gation, in the Flatbush Church, one shall, on the same day, deliver before the con- gregation a Peace Discourse, in which he shall rebuke all those, whether members of Consistory or others, who have had a hand in these irregular proceedings, or given occasion to such disorderly things, and charge them in future to conduct themselves in all brotherly love and discretion.
5. Ordination of Consistory .- On the day the confession was made, the ministers shall choose the Consistory, and the following day preach twice, give the threefold publication of the chosen Consistory, and then ordain them. Thus will the way be prepared for a regular call upon Arondeus, together with Van Sinderen. At the same time Van Sinderen must be recognized as a lawful minister, according to his call, and his just claims satisfied, among which the arrears due him are in all equity to be reckoned.
6. Report of the Committee .- The plan of the Rev. Messrs. Frelinghuysen and De Ronde was read in the Assembly, and unanimously approved, and the committee thanked for their pains. The first portion, which related to Dom. Van Sinderen, was laid before him. He agreed to it, and confessed his faults. At the same time he presented a complaint against his own party, viz., the Consistory. The second portion, which defines what both shall confess in their confession-sermons, was laid before them, and the answer delayed until to-morrow.
The Assembly separated with thanksgiving. Tempus Conventius to-morrow, at nine, A. M.
SESSION X .- WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 23-FORENOON.
After prayer, the minutes were read according to custom, and two exceptions taken.
1. (Ad. Sess. IX., 4.) Request of Nagel, etc .- Phil Nagel, Dan. Bodet, and Dan. Duryea, being at their own request, introduced, inquired whether the confession-sermons of both could be softened in any degree, and were answered that their request would be taken ad referendum.
3190
ECCLESIASTICAL RECORDS
1751
2. (Ad Sess. IX., 6.) Answers .- The Assembly is satisfied with the answer of Dom. Van Sinderen, submitting to the decision; but Ab. Lott has no authority to declare anything contrary to the opinion of their people, and continues to refuse to call Arondeus.
Arondeus asked whether, if he did not submit to the confession-sermon, he was to expect no call from Long Island? At his request for delay, for time to consider, he is allowed till this afternoon, at two o'clock.
Assembly separated with thanksgiving. Tempus Conventius at two, P. M.
SESSION XI .- WEDNESDAY AFTERNOON.
After prayer, the minutes were read and approved.
1. Answer to Arondous's Quacrit .- This was, that if he did not conform to the measures of the Coetus, no call on him from Long Island would be allowed.
2. Answer to Nagel, etc .- P. Nagel, D. Bodet, and Dan. Duryee were informed that the Coetus adheres to its former resolution.
3. Arondcus's Categorical Answer .- Arondeus said that he would confess as much as his conscience and reason would allow according to God's Word, maintaining all freedom in words, and governing himself in all things by the letter of the Coetus. Jacob Remsen declared, in the name of Brooklyn, that they would never recognize Dom. Van Sinderen as Minister, unless he again went around for a new call; but an elder from that village showed himself inclined to peace, and willing to do his best thereto. Ph. Nagel, from Flatbush, said that they would not be bound for Van Sinderen's back salary, but if his friends will unite with us, we will have both Van Sinderen and Arondeus for our ministers. Yet, for myself, I promise, as a pattern to others, to bestow a gift, although not so much as my arrears on salary, and to urge the same on others. Dan Bodet, in the name of Bushwick, said that that vil- lage was inclined to peace, and willing to pay both preachers, provide the others do for the future. As for the arrears, he himself would make a gift, possibly more than was at present due from him, and would do his best to induce others to do the same. This was confirmed by William Leeting, for himself. John Lott, in the name of New Amersfort, said that they were for peace and for both ministers; if Van Sinderen's friends would accept and pay Arondeus, they would for the future do the same for Van Sinderen. As for arrears, they would take that into considera- tion. The delegate from N. Utrecht, being absent on account of domestic circum- stances, Arondeus, in their name, reported their willingness to receive Van Sinderen in the same form and manner as himself.
4. Decision .- The parties having withdrawn, it was unanimously determined that the committee on the confessions and the choosing of the Consistory should see that Arondeus performed all the things mentioned in the letter, and that he should have freedom of words. The committee should also take care seriously and conscien- tiously that Van Sinderen's arrears are made good.
5. The Committee .- The Rev. Messrs. Ritzema, De Ronde, and Frelinghuysen, each with an elder, and Don. Erickson and Leydt for Secundi, were appointed the com- mittee; to meet on Tuesday, November 26th; but if the weather is unfit for traveling on the previous Monday, then on the 27th.
6. It is also agreed that between this time and Nov. 26th, Arondeus may prosecute his ministry in Kings County, in statu quo.
7. Queens County .- If the Committee can be of any service to Queens County, the Coetus hereby intrusts that matter to them.
The Assembly was closed with thanksgiving to God.
Collatum Concordat.
(Signed,) John Leydt, h. t. President. J. H. Goetschius, h. t. Clerk.
PROTEST, DELIVERED TO THE COETUS OF NEW YORK [ON OCT. 16] BY REV. ULPIANDUS VAN SINDEREN AND ONE HUNDRED AND FIFTY-EIGHT FATHERS OF FAMILIES. OCTOBER 1751.
Portfolio, " New York ", Vol. ii.
It is our desire that the (Coetus) Assembly may be blest, and receive light and truth for its guidance in every path of righteousness.
OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK.
3191 1751
We, the Consistories, and the entire Magistracy, together with the other members of the Church of Jesus Christ in Kings County although represented by our oppo- nents as a small and insignificant number, have nevertheless unitedly and with one accord, as our names herewith appear, considered what we are bound in conscience to do, in the matter of the call of Rev. Joh. Arondeus as our pastor and teacher.
Rev. Fathers! the calling of a minister is not a trifling matter. It is not a work of mere human affection and peaceableness; of forgiving one his misconduct; or not counting against him his robbing of reputations, and use of slanderous language. All these things we are cheerfully willing to do in the case of the one above named. But the making out of a Call, in accordance with our Church Order, that we wait upon the Lord with fasting and prayer. On the use of these means, the eternal wel- fare of our souls, as well as of those of the members of our families, depends. On the use of these means, depend the comfort, refreshment and edification of God's people in this life; while, on the other hand, the neglect of them, leads to the destruction of our churches, the strengthening of the hands of the ungodly, the grieving of God's people, disruptions and quarrels. This our sad experience, in con- nection with an ill-directed call has now taught us. Do not take it amiss, therefore, when, at such a time, we want to go to work with deliberation. Do not take it amiss, when we neither can nor will be pressed to consent to a call, which at bottom we take to be so injurious.
We consider a call extended to Rev. John Arondeus to be of such a character. We cannot, we may not, we dare not incur guilt in this matter. Every quality which we ought to look for in a minister is wanting in him. This, your own decision, arrived at last year, shows. Is the man improved? Has he in the least shown him- self penitent? Ah! tell us, Rev. Fathers, in what respect? and you will easily bring us over to your mind. But as the case now stands, we must tell you, that we leave it to your judgement whether we have no good reason to abide by our refusal.
1. Notwithstanding every friendship shown him, every benefit bestowed upon him, he has been unwilling to be our minister. On his arrival we gave him three hundred pounds. We showed him great honor and respect. But, against all Church Order, he has absolved himself from his call, and hired himself out, (elsewhere), for a time, not without giving the appearance of his being actuated by covetousness. And at last, he entirely left us in our need. In this, however we observe the good hand of God.
2. Ought we to call a man who, as he himself declares, has heard a voice from God telling him to go? For, if he is indeed a man worthy of receiving such communica- tions, ought we to tempt him to be disobedient thereto, and cause him to fare like the prophet who prophesied against Bethel? But, if he did not hear a voice from God saying, Go, as we really think, he must have been addressed by a spirit of fanaticism, or else he must be acting under false pretenses. If the former is the case, does the Assembly advise us to call a person who is a fanatic? If it is the latter, that is no qualification to commend a minister to a church for a call.
3. Ought we to bring a curse upon him? This will take place if he stays. For, he has often, under solemn oath, declared, "May God punish me, if I remain in this country." Would the curse upon him be a blessing to the churches that call him? Surely not.
4. Why should we call him to fill the office of the ministry? For before your last meeting, not five weeks ago, he said that in five years he would do no more family visiting, and that he would accept no call, save as one hired for a term of years. Does the Rev. Assembly conscientiously advise us to call such a man? Does it consider such a man properly fitted for our churches? And does it thus clear its conscience ?
5. What is there in him that is commendable and would be suitable for our churches? Why, therefore, should the Assembly ask us to call him? Should the Assembly recommend, and consider it right, for us to call the man whom it recently called, "a disturber of our Israel", as was done at the session preceding the last. We, indeed, believe that he is "a disturber of our Israel". Would such a course be acting the part of faithful overseers of the churches of Jesus? Or is the man, per- haps, now changed? But what evidence, Rev. Fathers, did he give of that change, previous to your last meeting only four weeks ago? Did he prove it in his public slander of three of your members? Or, in the bloody threats he made? Certainly not. Well then, he is still "the disturber of Israel", and ought we to call such a man?
3192
ECCLESIASTICAL RECORDS
1751
6. We have no right to have anything to do with a call, which we perceive must be to the detriment of our churches, and cause sadness to their people. Will healing come by him, who, from the first, showed his malignancy and passion by unsettling good order? Shall such a one, without showing any sign of change, be deemed fit by your Revs. for restoring order? Where are the qualities in him necessary to that end? Where is the meekness, the peaceableness, the modesty, the ability to bear with evil men? Where do we see in him the wisdom, the prudence, the discretion which we look for in a person whom we call to be our minister? Are not all oppo- site traits to be found in him, instead? Who cut off, without any ecclesiastical pro- cedure, the entire Church at Gravesand? (Gravesend). Who attacked publicly from the pulpit the name and fame of respected members of his church? Who made so many bloody threats? Who made trouble in other churches? Who infringed on our rights? If now he wants us to call him, and we should call him, would it not be like bringing the Trojan horse, on Sinon's advice, within the walls? like casting fire into the temple? like leading the wolf into the sheepfold? like putting the lion, before he is willing to eat straw, with the small cattle in the barn-yard? Would we be guiltless? and ought an Assembly, so greatly revered, decide such a thing to be right and advisable?
7. We have no right to call one who closes up the way to peace and rest in our troubled churches. But with this man, that would be the case. For, if we call Arondeus, the discord will continue. Whereas, if we do not, we can call another minister to be associated with Rev. Van Sinderen, who will be agreeable to both parties, and on whom minds now divided, can unite. Thus strife will cease, like fire for lack of wood: like the light of a lamp for lack of oil.
8. If he is, indeed, unworthy of a place in the pulpit, why should we put him there as one eminently fit? Ought one who intruded himself into the churches, and who actually came, (as he himself declared), to oust the minister of these churches,- ought he not himself to be thrust out and ousted? What other kind of judgement does our Church Order pass upon such intruders? Yea, indeed, what was your own judgement, at that time when you desired that a general silence should be imposed upon him? Ought we to call him who despises all law who mocks at his judges, who slanders Assemblies, and who, for the evil which he has done us, stands already adjudged, by the ecclesiastical court, as unworthy of being received else. where ?- Judge ye, Men and Brethren!
9. And what would be the consequences? To call a man back to the same place, which, after having created there a great disturbance, he ungratefully left; and into which, afterwards, in an unecclesiastical way, he again intruded himself: a man who swore that he would not stay there; a man against whom church Assemblies give warning; a man who is unwilling to perform certain parts of his office as minister :- think of it, Men and Brethren, what the consequences must be.
(a) Will not every Demas and Diotrephes, eager for a pleasant place, seek to get a following, thrust himself in by force, and then, besides, get himself ecclesiastically accepted, as this man has done, and now again desires to do?
(b) Will not every schismatic person bring in a minister after his own heart, thus disturbing the peace and causing trouble? and then even triumph and glory in it, as his partisans have done and still desire to do? Under such circumstances, how soon will our Zion be ploughed through like a field! How soon will every protecting wall of Church Order be thrown down, and the wild boar enter to tear up root and branch!
Therefore, Rev. Fathers, the matter is a very important one. We ask you, we beg you, we look to you, for that which we have proved to be your duty, and which you, by your action of last year, did set before us as your example. Oh! help us against this intruder. Remove this oppressor. Restrain this violator of our fathers' privileges, this ravisher of our own. Do not bind him as a burden on our hearts. Seek to protect us against his rage. Say not that you have no power to do this. We desire of you nothing more than your ecclesiastical judgement against him. We do not ask you for a band of soldiers or men armed with political authority. No; but only for your decision that he must. go. Give us that, and (or even?) a stranger will have pity on us. We continue to hope that you will not refuse such a reason- able request, but that you will join hands with us for the maintenance of our rights and the preservation of our excellent Rules.
Be it known, however, to the Rev. Assembly, that we are not at all actuated in this by some special hate or anger. If there is anything of the kind in our hearts
OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK.
3193 1751
against Rev. Arondeus, we are willing to be reconciled with him. It is only the matter of his being called by us, and of his intruding himself into our churches, that we are speaking of. And we humbly pray God, that this man, Arondeus, may be led to have a knowledge of himself, to turn about and humble himself, and to show himself to be a different man. In such event, we would not refuse him. We forgive him the wrong done us. For his slander and threats, we shall not persecute him, or seek his destruction. But we will rejoice when God gives him repentance unto life. And who knows, Men and Brethren, if he be justly dealt with, if he be humbled, but that the Lord will bless such treatment of him, and he may yet be saved as if by fire; and that he will thank you, and God, for the means used, though they proved to be to the destruction of the flesh. Thus you would also find your own conscience kept from violation; and thus all the ends of ecclesiastical authority would be gained.
This, Rev. Fathers, O you who are the Hope of our Churches, the Maintainers of our Order the Defenders of our Church Rights, is what we now desire to bring before you for your consideration. Keeping a copy of this letter, we hope to send it also to the Rev. Classis, and to stand by it.
The Lord reigns! Amen.
No 6.
In the name of all, U. Van Sinderen.
Done at Vlackebosch, October 1751.
N. B. Accompanying this were one hundred and fifty eight names of heads of families who were all against calling Arondeus, and who were exclusively of Kings County.
Entitled on the Back:
Protest delivered to the Coetus by U. Van Sinderen and one hundred and fifty eight fathers of families. To be found also in the letter of Joh. Frielinghuysen, being No. 142.
CORRESPONDENCE IN AMERICA.
The Coetus, (per Rev. J. Ritzema, ) to Rev. John Arondeus. No date, but probably October, 1751. Portfolio, "New York ", Vol. ii.
My dear Sir and Brother Arondeus :-
The Assembly is deeply affected with grief and sorrow of heart, at what it has come to know about your affairs as well as those of your party. God is witness that the Assembly's aim is not your ruin and destruction, but your life and salva- tion. Its desire is not that you should become useless to the Church of God; but its heartfelt prayer is that God may make you worthy and meet for your responsible ministry. We shall all have to rend in our account; and, possibly, the day is near at hand in which we, ourselves, in particular, who have had souls entrusted to us, must give account as to how we have acquitted ourselves of our duty with regard to them. The Assembly is of opinion, that this thought, particularly, ought to make you feel humble. Inasmuch as so many evidences of your misconduct, in the matter in question, have come to its knowledge, it feels in conscience bound, however much its compassion would have it otherwise, to require of you to make a confession of your misconduct, before it dares to decide on the expediency of your again being called to Long Island.
1. The Assembly had hoped that love for so many immortal souls would weigh so much upon your heart that you could not cut yourself loose from them so easily; and it now expects that you will humble yourself before God, on that account, and promise never again thus lightly to leave your charge.
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.