USA > New York > Ecclesiastical records, state of New York, Volume VI > Part 32
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
" 13th. That if no objections be made by the members, by the third Sunday after the elections, the elders and deacons so chosen are confirmed in and admitted to their respective offices, and that they are not elders and deacons until such con- firmation and admission.
" 14th. That the usage and practice with regard to the proposing, confirmation, and admission, objecting against and setting aside of elders and deacons respectively, in the said Dutch Church at New York, has hitherto been conformable to the usage and practice of the churches of Holland last mentioned, and that the elders and deacons of the said Church in New York, agreeable to the regulations of the churches of Holland last mentioned, are not admitted to their respective offices until such proposal, made for three successive Sundays after their election, and confirmation thereupon.
" 15th. That this province was conquered by the Dutch, and afterwards, in -, was yielded by treaty to the crown of England.
" John Bogert, Jr., and others, - Ads. Abel Hardenbrook.
" And the jurors aforesaid, upon their oath aforesaid, do further say, that the province of New York is part of the country formerly called New Netherlands, and was, before the surrender of the same to the crown of England, subject to the States General of the United Province in Europe, and was settled by subjects to the States General.
" 2nd. That antecedent to the said surrender, there were churches in the said province, and that all the churches in the same were supplied with ministers from the United Provinces of the national established Church there, sent out by and subject to the ecclesiastical government of the Classis of Amsterdam.
" 3rd. That the churches of the national establishment of the said United Provinces in Europe, and especially those within the district of the said Classis, have always had a succession of elders and deacons, chosen from time to time by the majority of the elders and deacons of the said churches respectively, and minis- ters present, without the voices of the other members of the same churches.
1765
39SS
ECCLESIASTICAL RECORDS
"4th. That the Dutch churches in this country, antecedent to the said surrender, were governed in a manner conformable to the practice and usage of the national established churches of the United Provinces in Europe, and the offices and places of the elders and deacons of the same have always been, upon every vacancy and avoidance, supplied by the election, nomination, and appointment of the majority of the elders and deacons in office, without the voices of the other members of the same.
"5th. That the same government, usage, and practice, was continued from the said surrender, in the Dutch Church of the city of New York, until the same was incorporated by the letters patent above-mentioned.
"6th. That for above sixty years past, after the grant of the said letters patent of incorporation, there had been a constant succession of elders and deacons in the said church, so incorporated, chosen for the time being, without the voices of any of the other members of the same, in the nomination and appointment of elders and deacons.
"7th. And the jurors aforesald, upon their oath aforesald, do further find the article of capitulation at the surrender of this province in the year 1664-pront :
" Sth. And the jurors aforesald, upon their oath aforesald, do further say, that, according to the constitution and directions of the Reformed Churches in Holland, approved and Instituted by the National Synod of Dort, the elders and deacons of the sald churches do, with the ministers present, annually nominate and appoint the next succeeding elders and deacons, without the consent, approbation, voice, or election of any of the other members of the sald churches, then had in the said nomination and appointment.
"9th. And the jurors aforesald, upon their oath aforesald, do further say, that the plaintiff In this action, since the date of the sald charter, has been nominated and appointed three several times to the respective offices of elder and deacon of the sald Reformed Protestant Dutch Church of the city of New York, by the then present elders and deacons of the sald church, without the consent, approbation, volce, or election of any of the other members of the sald church, then had In the sald nomination and appointment, which respective offices he did accept of, and act in the execution of ; and that he has, since the date of the said charter or letters patent, at three several times nominated and appointed, together with the elders and deacons of the sald church, then In office with him, and without such consent. approbation, volce, or election, as aforesaid, of the other members of the said church, to succeed In sald respective offices.
" 10th. And the jurors aforesald, upon their oath aforesald, do further say, that it was the practice, usage, and custom of the Reformed Protestant Dutch Churches In the United Netherlands, before and at the time of the said articles of surrender, and of the Reformed Protestant Dutch Church In the sald letters patent of incor- poration mentioned, ever since until the day of the exhibition of the plaintiff's bill, for the respective ministers for the time being of the said churches, on the three Sundays next succeeding every respective nomination and appointment of the elders and deacons of the sald respective churches, to notify and declare anch nomination and appointment to the several congregations in which the said elders and deacons were respectively nominated and appointed, In order to know whether any of the members of the said churches dissent from or disapprove of such nomination and appointment, and in default of such dissent and disapprobation to set apart, con- firm, and ordain such elders and deacons In and to their respective offices.
" If the law Is for the plaintiff, we find for the plaintiff, and five pounds ten shillings damages.
"If the law is for the defendants, we find for the defendants.
" Filed 26th April, 1765.
" New York, April 30th. 1765.
" The preceding, wrote on eight pages In follo, Is a true copy of the original special verdict given In the cause, Abel Hardenbrook against John Bogert, Jr., and others.
" Examined by
Signed, Go. Banyar, D. C. C. C."
OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK.
3989
1765
ACTS OF THE CLASSIS OF AMSTERDAM.
(ISAAC RYSDYK.)
1765, May 6th. Art. 5. Rev. Isaac Rysdyk upon a written request from New York, and in pursuance of a letter-of-call serv- ing for that purpose, has been called thither as a minister, by the Messrs. Deputies ad res Exteras. This Assembly approves of this call, and he (Rysdyk) did accept it in the fear of the Lord, and signed his name to this effect. Having also been lawfully dis- missed from his church at Egteld, and from the Rev. Classis of Thiel, he requests to be installed in the Sacred Office, as minister of Poughkeepsie, Fishkill, (New) Hackensack and Hopewell. His request was granted him, and this was done with the prayer for the divine blessing upon him. He signed the Formulae of Concord, promised to correspond with this body, and to conduct himself in subordination thereto. The copy of the call, and the subscription, as well as the recommendation from New York, shall be recorded by the Messrs. Depp. ad res Exteras. xiv. 28.
(COETUS OF NEW YORK. BOELEN.)
Art. 9. The Deputati ad res Exteras make known, 1. That they have conversed together more than once about a proper answer to the letter of the Coetus brethren in New York, and also with some of the oldest members of the Classis. They have found the matter, however, of so much importance and consider- ation, that they would rather postpone their pre-advice, and their letter of reply based thereon, until the next Classis. 2. Further- more the Deputies ad res Exteras report that they have extended the call of the four united churches (of Queens County) on Long Island (or) Nassau, to the Rev. Mr. Hermanus Lancelot Boelen, minister at Schoonebeek, (in Holland). He has also accepted this call, and will be installed in June or July. xiv. 32.
4
? 1765
3990
ECCLESIASTICAL RECORDS
CHURCH OF NEW YORK.
Repairs .- Communion Table.
New York, May Sth, 1765.
Consistory held after calling on God's name.
1. It was represented to be necessary that the tower should be pointed, and also the front of the church. Thereupon it was unanimously agreed that this should be done, and the work was committed to the Church Masters.
2. Resolved, That the table for the Lord's Supper in the New Church be enlarged, since circumstances require it.
3. Resolved to paint the inside of the New Church; also the house in which Luke Romme Ilves, and to alter the chimneys of the same; for, on account of the driving down of the smoke, the dwelling is made uncomfortable.
Signed etc.,
J. Ritzema, p. t. President.
ACTS OF THE CLASSIS OF AMSTERDAM. WILLIAM JAKSON.
1765, June 3rd. Art. 7 ad 9. A letter from Mr. Nicholas Michel, residing in this city, signed Amsterdam, June 1, 1765, to the Rev. Kalkoen, V. D. M., at Amsterdam, served to communi- cate the fact, that the writer, upon the request of this body made to him through Rev. Budde, had written to Rev. Jakson, minister at Bergen and Staten Island, on June 1, 1764, about his bitter and extremely improper communication to this Classis. He had re- quested him hereafter to send no more letters [to this Classis]. The said Rev. Jakson. however, had been sick for a long time ; but on May 28, 1765, another letter had come from him, dated Bergen in New Jersey April 5, wherein he requests Mr. Michell, in his name, to beg the Rev. Classis humbly to pardon him on account of the bitter, passionate and improper epithets and expres- sions in his letters ; that to the use of these, he had been incited by others, to whom he had imprudently yielded ; but that afterwards he had heartily detested such conduct, and it had appeared very grievous to him. It was preferable that he should never write letters again to the Rev. Classis than to treat said Classis and its worthy members thus. Again did he entreat forgiveness of Clas- sis in his letter, and begged that his conduct might not be counted against him. The Assembly accepted these statements as informa- tion. xiv. 35.
OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK.
3991 1765
1
THE CLASSIS OF AMSTERDAM TO THE SO-CALLED COETUS, JUNE 3,
1765. VOL. 31; P. 235. No. 155. REFERRED TO, VOL. 24; 106.
With an Introducton by the Conferentie, dated Oct. 11, 1765. They published 400 English and 600 Dutch copies, of which only one English copy is now known to remain. This is in the Archives of General Synod:
INTRODUCTION.
Worthy Reader :-
Behold here, the Letter of the Rev. Classis of Amsterdam, written to the so-called Coetus, as appears from [its Address] and its date. It is in answer to a letter of theirs, in which they showed their dissatisfaction in reference to the decision of the Synod of North Holland. The [Conferentie] Assembly deems it necessary to pub- lish this letter, in order that those, who make it their business to talk of these things, whether on the one side or the other, may understand the true state of affairs, and what opinion should be held of those who refuse to hold to that relation- ship to the Netherland Church which their ancestors have always maintained.
We have nothing to add in regard to this letter, except to guard the reader against mistaking the meaning of the expression "The New York Church." By that expression is to be understood, not the congregation only of the City of New York, but all the Dutch churches in the Province of New York and New Jersey. Nor do we know what the Rev. Classis means when, near the end of their letter, they say, "that Rev. Freyenmoet also had acted in a similar way at Poughkeepsie in relation to Rev. Vos." We leave the transcribers to account for that.
Signed in the name of the [Conferentie] Assembly of Ministers and Elders con- nected with the Classis of Amsterdam.
Joan Ritzema, p. t. President Lambertus de Ronde, p. t. Scriba.
New York, Oct. 11, 1765.
[THE LETTER OF THE CLASSIS JUNE 3, 1765.] (
Rev. Sirs and Brethren :-
The letter of your Revs. came duly to hand.
First: In reference to the principal matter contained in it, there is no necessity of making further reply. Because it contains nothing new, but only repetitions of old arguments, with which the Rev. Classis has been already long enough annoyed; and because the Classis, in its affectionate regard for the welfare of the Church of (the Province of) New York, has already made frequent responses to the points involved. For example :----
In their correspondence with Rev. (Gualterus) Du Bois, and in special letters, dated Sept. 12, 1737: April 27, 1738; Aug. 20, 1739. Also subsequently in letters to the Coetus, dated April 5, 1755; Dec. 9, 1755; Jan. 15, 1761; and to the so-called Coetus, Jan 11, 1763. Besides, there are the resolutions of the Synod of North Holland of 1756, 1757, sent expressly to your Revs .; and a letter dated Oct. 3, 1763, with an enclosed extract of the Acts of the Synod of North Holland, 1763. By all of these, your Revs. ought to have been fully convinced of the groundlessness of your course of action, and of the propriety of ours. Nevertheless, to convince your Revs. that we desire to treat you with all love, we will yet this once write you. But if this again fails, your Revs. must not expect us to write again.
The "(Introduction" to your Revs. letter is not exactly in a fraternal spirit. When you become somewhat earnest in dealing with your own affairs in relation to the condition of the New York churches, you say :- "We do not feel disposed just now to reply to your letters, clearly perceiving, etc." We might justly retort: "We do not feel disposed to have anything more to do with your Revs., clearly per- ceiving that your aim, although you do not want to acknowledge it, is to become independent."
3992
1765
ECCLESIASTICAL RECORDS
THE SO-CALLED AMERICAN CLASSIS AND ITS DEMANDS.
Now as to the letter itself. Your Revs. are building upon propositions which have no foundations. The first is, that your Revs. are already constituted into a Classis, and that we are aeting improperly in not acknowledging that fact. But whence did your Revs. derive that Classical power? Upon what basis does it rest? Your Revs, know that you have arrogated that position to yourseives, and that we have many a time shown you the invalidity of it. And then, too, the demands whleh your Revs. make upon the Classis, in respect to that position, we are unable to concede; for we have neither the right nor the power to form a subordinate Church (body of churches) into a Classis. See our letter of Oct. 3, 1763. We cannot, therefore, recognize what you have done, because your Revs. without any right, constituted yourseives Into a Classis.
The second point is, that your Revs, are confounding the subordination of one church or Assembly to another, be such subordination greater or less, with an unlawful exercise of tyranny. But grades of subordination have always existed in every well-ordered Church; and tyranny is repudiated by us, even as it is done by Hoornbeck In his Summa Controverslarum", page 666. It is, therefore, unbrotherly In you to charge us with tyranny, as your Revs. certainly have done in several passages of your letter.
But your Revs., Men and Brethren, know well enough that we do not seek to lord It over son; yet you should recognize our authority as being in accordance with the covenant made by your ancestors with the Classis of Amsterdam, and which is still binding. For, although the Church of (the Province of) New York has widely extended Itself, she must continue to possess the same general nature, and to stand in the same general relation to the Rev. Classis of Amsterdam as formerly. The Rev. Classis neither can nor may change this relationship; but she takes this position :
Will son attempt to stand alone? to become independent, and call yourself a Classis? That is something which does not concern ourselves so much; no, not even if you should call yourself a Synod. Only then, we must not be required to recognize you as such. We must not be asked, as your Revs. seem to suppose, to consider your Revs, as a Church standing in the ancient and well-ordered relatlon to us; but we must regard you as a body, which, intentionally, and for reasons best known to yourselves, has broken off such relationship, bas separated from us, and which we are compelled, therefore, to let go.
The passages which you quoted are elther unhappily quoted, like those from Voetlus; or are wrongly adduced, ilke those from Hoornbeck In his "De Canone Dordracena"; in that they have for their basis, a "Constitution" which you have arrogated to yourselves, but do not really possess. And If these things are so, Men and Brethren, why do you wrong us, and strike blows at your brethren. Is it tyranny to labor to prevent your acquiring an irregular independence? For it is independence which you are evidently striving after.
THE ARGUMENTS OF THE COETUS.
But several other things are mentioned in your letter to which we must give attention.
You give certain reasons in support of your views. You say that you are not disposed to argue from history, but from inherent rights and the authority thus derived. But, Brethren, If we would proceed properly, we may not separate these two things; for In this business, "right" is founded on "history". For in the history lles the nature of the relationship between the Church of the Netherlands and the Church of New York. The latter Is located in a country which formerly belonged to the Netherlands; and which became subordinated to the Church of the Netherlands, through the control over it of the Classis of Amsterdam ; and it can- not now be treated otherwise than according to the nature of that relationship. And that right remains invlolate, notwithstanding the fact that New York now belongs to the Kingdom of England. This appears from the Third Artiele of the Treaty of Peace of 1667, already eited in our letter of Oct. 3, 1763.
OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK.
3993 1765
Your Revs. also decline to be subordinate to the Classis of Amsterdam, because, as you say, that those who are subordinate must bave a right to a seat in the sessions of Classis; but you thus admit that you have never, hitherto, been mem- bers. Now the Classis acknowledges that your Revs. were never such members, (of Classis, entitled to a seat in Classis); and she also asserts that you can never become such members. See the letter of Oct. 3, 1763. But it does not follow that you are not subordinated to Classis.
This we support with but a single argument which rests upon your own prin- ciples. Your Revs. compare yourselves with other colonies of this Realm. Well, those other colonies of this Realm are in subordination to the Rev. Classis, but none of their ministers are full members, entitled to seats in Classis; and your Revs. would consider it a folly, if we admitted a minister who came from Batavia or elsewhere to full membership, with a seat In Classis.
Furthermore, your Revs. point out the necessity for more Dutch ministers among you, if your Church is not to lose ground. You assert that there are, indeed, young men, but that no one wants to take the risk of sending them across (the ocean for ordination). Need we speak of the fact that the desire, as thus expressed, for more ministers, seems to be limited to the party desiring Independence? This, however unpleasant to hear, is the one thing in your mind-Independence!
We would also remark, that if you will not risk sending over those young men, (for ordination), we cannot and will not recognize the ministers who have been appointed, examined and ordalned by your Revs. as ministers standing in a lawful connection with the Church of the Netherlands, and so with the Classis of Amster- dam: yet such is the relation, according to the Treaty of Peace, and the Constitu- tion of our Church, and in which, they ought to stand.
Your Revs. further state that the Presbyterians are on the increase, because, from their first settlement, opportunity was given them, through the assistance of Scotland, to advance their young men to the ministry; and your Revs. take occasion therefrom to reproach us for neglect in this matter. But, Brethren, in your own case, you wanted to separate the history from the inherent rights; yet now, to help on your own case, you appeal to the history of the Presbyterlans, as the basis of their right. But you must perceive that this is inconsistent. But be that as it may! In reference to the planting of your Church, and your transfer to the English Government, you do not thereby acquire a similar right. Hence, the illustration from the Presbyterians does not help your case.
Furthermore, did the Presbyterians accomplish their work by the assistance of Scotland? Well, your Fathers accomplished their work by the assistance of the Classis of Amsterdam-by virtue of the relation in which they stood to that body. Then, also, they enjoyed prosperity; but now, that you are withdrawing from that original source of aid, you are rent with divers discords.
ACADEMIES.
You also state that the Independents, the Episcopalians and the Presbyterians already have Seminaries, (Kweekscholen), to which the Dutch are obliged to send their children ; and that these are thus exposed to strange opinions. But this must not be made a reason to keep them there, but it is a reason to send them over to Holland ; for, if they remain, that only serves to confirm them in those principles already imbibed ; but if they are sent to Holland, the nature of the Constitution of the New York Church can be impressed upon them for the correction of their earlier received ideas.
You also aver that the use of the Dutch language grows less, while the use of the English increases. Hence you conclude that there cannot be sent as many English- speaking ministers as are needed; and in conclusion, your Revs. ask-Must the Church, then, disappear with the language? But, Brethren, what has the change in language to do with sub-ordination or non-subordination to the Rev. Classis. Does the truth depend on the language? The Church can be preserved, although the language changes. Those who speak English can pursue their studies in our Uni- versities, as well as Hungarians, Poles, etc. These may then be examined through the Latin tongue, and ordained, even as Rev. Laidlie was ordained here and sent to you.
109
4
3994
ECCLESIASTICAL RECORDS
1765
Finally in the way of a threat, it is said that there will have to come a separation from the Netherland Church, with the cessation of the correspondence, upon the fact, as was also stated in the beginning, that there is little to be feared by us from the loss of Classical or Synodical contributions. (love-gifts, liefde-gaven). Will you, then, secede and stand by yourselves? We have never constrained you to remain. All that we have ever derived from the New York Church has been trouble. Its discords and oppositions have grieved us much, and if no Improvement is pos- sible, we would be very wliling to be relieved of the care.
But you show, Brethren, where the shoe pinches. You do not want to be subordi- nate to the Classis, because you receive no contributions from her. But how does this consist with nobility of character, (edeimoedig), to withdraw from a legal subordination to a Classis because, (as you put it), it involves no loss of love- gifts? We leave this, Brethren, to your own consciences. Yet your Revs. also know weil-enough how Rev. (Theodore) Frelinghuysen collected, or at least attempted to collect, contributions in Holland. [In 1759-60, for his proposed Academy].
THE CIVIL OATH.
The mention of two other matters completed your letter. One is the subject of the oath, (of allegiance to Great Britain), and certain legal advice on that subject. We have received the several documents sent on that subject, and have read them, and we thank your Revs. for sending them.
Now in reference to that oath : You yourselves admit that that oath, like many other laws, was originally directed against unlawful seizures by the Romish Power, and, therefore, can have no reference to us, except by an unjust application. If such was the occasion of Its original institution, then it must be of ancient date, Indeed. It must belong to a time when the violence of the Romish Power gave occasion for its Institution. Hence it cannot be now considered as a new means of drawing the churches of New York away from their subordination to the Church of the Netherlands, and thus from the Classis of Amsterdam. Neither can the Classis conceive that those who take that oath. and yet remain subordinate to the Classis, are as seriously guilty of any impropriety as is insinuated. For there have always been brethren, and there are still such, who, while reluctantly remaining subordinate to the Classis, nevertheless have lived, and do stiff live undisturbed in that country.
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.