USA > New York > Ecclesiastical records, state of New York, Volume VI > Part 41
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
4050
ECCLESIASTICAL RECORDS
1766
selves according to the letter written to Classis in 1754 [Oet. 17.] Rev. Laidlle also agreed to this; which was, that they [the consistory] hold themselves subordl- nate directly to the Classis of Amsterdam. Whereupon you read the answer of our Classis [July 21, 1755], to that letter [of 1754], but your determination remained fixed, to continue independent.
We may remark to you, in passing, that we are sorry that you have to struggle so hard against those, [Laidlie, the elders, etc.], who so far as their declarations go, seem to be in entire agreement with you, and to be willing to conduct theni- selves In subordination to the Rev. Classls. Nevertheless, at the same time, they do not seem to be willing to co-operate toward seailng the bonds of peace, nor toward preserving Invlolate In your land the Constitution of the Church. As. regards the principal matter, we will reply thereto, directly to the [Elders and Deacons of the] church who hnve said the same things as yourselves In a letter to us. As to the rest, we thank you for the Information we have received on eertnin matters, which the Consistory had written to us against you [the Conferentle]. We will avall ourselves of your statement about this matter, In our reply to the Consistory, with the hope that by our words of gentleness, we may turn aside thelr opposition.
Meanwhile, they make complaint that, except once, the elders have not been asked to attend a meeting of the Conferentle since 1754. You report in reference to this matter, that there was nothing to do [In the Conferentie] but to write a letter to the Classis and make a report on the churches; that In reference to nll Important matters they were consulted. Nevertheless, since the year 1754, there must have occurred circumstances more than once [In which they should have been consulted]; and it is certainly true, that In a good church government, elders are also rulers, and It Is therefore, only just that they should be asked to partielpnte, [In your dellberations]. The Classis understands, that If it is not essential to call them in for everything; yet the letters to the Classis, and the report of the Church, do not belong to the ministry alone, but to the entire Consistory. May God grant you mutual forbearance, and to be zealous always to do that which is right.
In reference to your postscript: The Classis thinks It would be rather hard to erase the names, from the Ministerial Register, of all those who belong to the so-called Coetns party. This would rather tend to drive them further away than to Improve them. [There Is a paranoiasla here in the Dutch: reriteren ra. ver- beteren. This might be freely reproduced-tend to embitter them, rather than to better them.] Our alm, as Christians, should always be, although this may not always seem to us to be the best way, to win our brethren; especially, since It la always possible, that through our letters, the eyes of some of them may be opened, so that they will return to ns. But they might all the more hold themselves aloof, If they understood that their names Ind already been strleken off the roll.
In another letter of Nov. 22nd, 1765, you refer to the Minutes of the [Con- ferentie] Assembly held Oet 8 1-10], 1765. We thank you for the Information given. We have examined the list of those who were present In that "Assembly of the Brethren who are subordinate to the Classis of Amsterdam." It also seemed clear to us therefrom, that the same partles were generally accustomed to be present at those Assemblles.
We remark, first: That we are sorry that the number of the churches, who hold themselves to their Orst obligations to the Classis, is so sinall; and that, too, among churches which have caused the Classes the most trouble. But we understand, Brethren, that this Is grevlous to you as well as to ns .- And In the second place: That the numbers in your Assembly would be greater If the wishes of the congre- gations were fulfilled by their ministers, who are disaffected. This appears from the very constitution of the Assembly, In which several elders appear without thelr ministers. The same fact also appears from the action taken at this Assembly In regard to these same ministers, whose replles you were kind enough to send us. While the Rev. Classis rejolces at your zeal in endeavorlng to retain those churches, and commends the prudent action taken by yon, In reference to Rev. Verbryck, pastor at Tappan, and Rev. Meyer, pastor at Kingston; yet the Classis Is grleved at the contents of thelr letters written to you; for they surely break all bonds of subordination, and overturn all well-established order. As to the rest, the Classis thinks that you will do well to assist these distressed churches, and to lend them a hand quo tis meliori modo, provided always that the gentle spirit of our Great Lord and Master shines through all your conduct.
4051
1766
OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK.
But, by the way: although Rev. Meyer declares that he was not called through us, but was sent [to Kingston] directly from Groningen; nevertheless he went unto a land whose churches belonged under the ecclesiastical government of the Nether- lands; and to a congregation which belonged to the Classis of Amsterdam. As a matter of course, therefore, if he enters into such relations, he becomes subject to the ruling power. The Rev. Classis, however, desires to make inquiry, whether, in his call, any mention was made of this matter? Also, do you know, whether, on the arrival of these [other] gentlemen [Cock and Kern] in their respective churches, their ecclesiastical relations [thereby formed] were brought to their attention, and whether they expressed themselves thereon? If these things did not take place, the Classis can only pity those churches which were thus deceived; neither can we see any remedy for their troubles. But if in any of these churches this matter was attended to, then those men may be compelled to fulfill their obli- gations; or, if they refuse, other means should be employed with them, out of regard for those churches.
The Classis observes from your conduct that you do not court persecution, but only wish to be prepared to resist the violence of others. For all these evils have been brought about by the sowing of evil seed by the brethren of the Coetus; as is the case with all Separatists. [But see under Oct. 1, 1754; Aug. 11, 1755.] And although the Classis is convinced of this, nevertheless, Worthy Brethren, we take the liberty to submit to your consideration, whether it is not better to keep discre- tion ever in view; especially when we perceive that by certain measures we offend some of the brethren. Is it not better to let some things go, than to do them, even with a good conscience, if it be thought that they will give offence? Do not make your demands too severe, Brethren. For the sake of him that is weak, we must sometimes yield a little. I will eat no meat while the world standeth lest I make my brother to offend.
But to come to the point in relation to this remark. It is a true mark of a genuine minister of the Gospel, to be instant in season and out of season; to sow beside all waters. But it does not follow from this that lie is obliged to go and preach the Gospel, either in private houses or churches, where he does not properly belong; neither should he do this in a language with which he is not familiar; nor in a language, for service in which another had been specially called, and who does preach, publicly, in that language, the Word of God. [Referring to De Ronde and Laidlie.]
Now offences may the more easily be removed when it is once admitted that the ground of the offence is a matter of little importance. The particular duties of each, for the edification of the church, must be so performed, that each fulfills just the ministration to which he was called; while other duties must be left to those who were called to perform them. Otherwise, one runs the risk of becoming a busy body in other men's matters. [1 Pet. 4:15.] And who knows, Brethren, but that this is one of those [small] things which the Consistory [the Elders] of New York, object to, and consider hard, and that, therefore, they refuse to appear in the Conferentie Assembly; for, in other respects, they say they are submissive to the Classis. Now your good sense, joined with a reasonable zeal,-(would that the Classis could succeed in convincing itself that your conduct was always godly zeal)-[your good sense] will prompt you readily to bid adieu to all such lines of action, when you perceive thereby that ill-feelings may be allayed, discords lessened, and perhaps the wills of those in opposition, be brought into agreement .- We must add, that we were pleased with the good order observed, and the excellent direc- tion of business in that Assembly: [Oct. 8-10, 1765]. The remark at the close of your Minutes, was very agreeable to the Classis, viz., that you were determined to follow in the steps of the Classis and leave the Coetus brethern to themselves; to stand by those congregations which desire our counsel and aid by word and deed. We believe that this is the best way to frustrate that notion that you are acting from ambition.
We learn with sorrow that among the restrictions upon your privileges are these: That your rights of possession in some of the Dutch churches are either altogether alienated, or are diminished and restricted; but that these rights were granted you by a Charter given by King William III. You express the opinion that it would be well for you to petition the King [George III] in the hope that thus everything might be set right; for [you say] your church is regarded in England
4052
ECCLESIASTICAL RECORDS
1766
as a National Church, entitled to hold property, and that a similar Charter has been granted to no other church.
In response, we say, that it seems to Classis only reasonable, that if a Church is to continue in existence, it must be able to retain its property, yet we doubt whether the plan you propose would be the best. For, Brethren, according to your plan, would not the business be viewed from a political standpoint. For, notwith- standing we have plainly shown in our former letter, that the pretence of the oath [to the English sovereign] was of little importance, according to the opinion of the Classis; yet the same finds protectio with lawyers, (for we have received legai opin- ions from two partles, [Wm. Smith and Wm. Livingston] on this subject,) and which protectio would be taken advantage of by the Coetus brethren. And, how- ever properly your plan might be brought forward at the right time, although you might have your characters defamed before the King, thereby, on loose grounds, set now, Instead of gaining your object, you might run the risk of being accounted rebels, and thus actually retard your cause. We think, therefore, that while you still have a certain share of church property, It is better for you to be content with the same. There yet remain churches which give evidence that will not sub- mit to that lordship [the Coctus, ] and who will therefore maintain thelr privileges and property [for themselves. ] It Is best, therefore, for yon to give such churches all possible encouragement, and to keep In good understanding with them .*
Indeed, would not the taking of such a step, which we disapprove, at least for the present, foster that prejudice in them as to your ambition. It seems, therefore, better to us to put your opponents to shame and to heap coals of fire on their head, by setting them an example of charity and meekness; not that we doubt that you already have these graces, Brethren, but we would that they might abide in you and be Increased.
But let us speak now of a few particular points: First, about private gatherings, held In New York by women and youth for the Exposition of the Bible; and for the arranging for other private gatherings, which Is done with closed doors, and where no one Is admitted but those who have Christ in the heart. This Is done In order that all preferences [of ministers?] may be made only according to eonselence .- You may easily understand what we think of such things, from our remarks about preaching away from one's appointed place. Do they not always, as a matter of course, choose a minister who Is preaching somewhere else than where his appointed congregation Is? or one whose own congregation Is not accustomed to be edified ? And If such things are done by women and youth In any place, It Is still more con- spicuous and Improper. These latter must be considered as lording It over the feelings, which Is quite out of place, for this belongs only to God; and then in shutting out others, they are dimming their own light.
Now about that matter, and other things pertalning to property, we have received also a private letter, signed by Abel Hardenbrock, Jacob Stoutenberg and Hubert Van Wagenen, who style themselves a Committee. They are zealous In advocating their own rights, and are of your own opinion In reference to the condition of the New York Church. We cannot, Brethren, reply to every person separately. This we have already declared In our letter of Ort. 3rd, 1763. This offended these brethren; but we acted thus, not because we would have nothing to do with them, personally, but because we cannot deal with every separate Individual. Wo write upon all affairs to the Assembly of the Subordinate Brethren. If, then, these partles are known to you, and you think proper to give them light, they may receive It from letters addressed to you: especially since their letter, as well as that of Rev. De Ronde, are of similar contents.
Finally, we received a supplement to a pamphlet [ De Ronde's] approved by Rev. Classis In April 1764, treating of "The Processlon of the Holy Ghost." The Rov. Classis understands that although It Is a supplement to a book already approved, set as It treats of a certain point of doctrine, that this has been sent also for our approbation. Wo discover some objectionable expressions. We do wish that the author had expressed himself more clearly; yet we nother nothing that we deem unorthodox.
*The Classis entirely misapprehended the allusions to the Charter. ete. [See Letter Oct. 22, 1765]. The Coetus Brethren [the stronger party of the twol. held a majorlty of the churches. Many of these churches had their own Independent charters ; but the Classis seems to have thought that the Charter of the Church In the City of New York. granted by William III In 1696, was a general charter of all Dutch churches collectively, or as we would now say, the Incorporation of the Denomination.
4053 1766
OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK.
We now close this our lengthy letter which accompanies the Minutes of the Synod of North Holland, held at Harlem in 1765, with an earnest prayer, that the Spirit of wisdom, steadfastness, prudence and meekness may take full possession of your souls, and strengthen you, so as to lead to the ending of all disputes. Amen.
Etc., etc. John Kalkoen, President etc., etc. William Van den Broek, Scribe, etc., etc.
In Classis, Amsterdam April 7, 1766.
THE CLASSIS OF AMSTERDAM TO REV. ARCHIBALD LAIDLIE, APRIL 7, 1766. VOL. 31, PAGE 260. No. 161.
To Rev. [Archibald] Leadly, [Laidlie] minister in New York.
Rev. and Esteemed Brother :-
The Classis was rejoiced to receive your letter and to be informed by yourself concerning not only the basis on which you acted, but the actual facts, as stated by yourself-in the Church of New York.
The basis of your work consisted in the fact that you were installed [for that field] by the Rev. Classis, on Feb. 5, 1763, and that you promised, then and there, to maintain "Correspondence" [with the Classis]; but you say that you do not remember that anything was then said to you particularly about the distressing disputes there existing, or even that there were any dispute at all; that Classis did not then instruct you as to the origin of any dispute, nor how to carry your- self in reference to them, nor which party to join; and, therefore, that you con- sidered that you were left entirely free.
You also say that upon your arrival you did not find such very great divisions; that certain divisions have arisen since, and still continue, and take up a large share of attention; and that divisions also manifest themselves in your own [English-speaking] congregation; but you felt that you must not encourage either of these factions; that you ought, if possible, to minimize them; and that, there- fore, whenever you found yourself in the presence of brethren of either party, you felt perfectly convinced, in your own heart, that it was your duty to join yourself to neither of the disputants. You were determined, however, simply to maintain the necessary "Correspondence" with the Classis of Amsterdam, in the same way as was common before the formation of either of the present Assemblies, [the Coetus or the Conferentie.]
You persisted on this, your determination, while you were a stranger and did not yet understand exactly how matters stood; for you were assured that your joining either party would only cause the fires of contention to burn more strongly in your own congregation; and that if you would be of any service, whatever, you must remain entirely neutral. And then your continuation in such a course, [you say] was for these reasons: because there were found certain things, in the prin- ciples of the Conferentie party, as well as in their conduct, which did not please you, and that these circumstances also decided you to remain neutral; that this party was yet struggling along without reaching any practical results; and that you, therefore, fell in with the idea of the New York Consistory, which wrote us a letter in 1754,* [Oct. 17], and which now again has written us a letter, (Oct. 24, 1765,) of the same purport, and which we will, in due time, answer; and that you stand in the same opinions and sentiments as those members, and that their opinion is that of a majority; yet that there are a very few, who, as you remark, approve of nothing which tends toward unity.
Your meaning is well-understood by Classis, which cannot now refrain from answering you in a kind and fraternal manner.
The Rev. Classis, indeed, at your installation, requested you to maintain "Cor- respondence" with the Classis. By this, nothing else was, nor could have been
*This letter says that they separate themselves from the Coetus, and resume the correspondence of their own church with the Classis, independent of any relation to the Coetus.
4054
ECCLESIASTICAL RECORDS
1766
meant, but that condition which is known as "Subordination to the Classis", or whatever other name you may be pleased to give it; and which is exhibited in the conduct of the Conferentie. We say that Classis could have meant nothing else. In requesting "Correspondence" with you, who were about to go to a certain country, whose Church Polity stood In a certain [inferior] relation to the Classis, it is undeniable that our request must have fully corresponded to that relationship, for the very purpose of keeping that relationship unchanged. By "Correspondence" Classis meant the exhibition of such a course of conduct as would naturally result from the very nature of the relation between the church of New York and the Classis of Amsterdam. If Classis did not tell you just how to act, and what party to join, it was because she took it for granted that, when you saw which of the brethren there conducted themselves toward the Classis agrecably to the funda- mental laws of the Church, and which of them departed therefrom, you would not need special instructions from the Classis but that you would easily discover just what you were to do. Consider then, Brother, what must have been the meaning of the Rev. Classis, and you can then answer whether you have conducted yourself according to the intentions of the Classis. You now know what the Classis meant by "Correspondence". It was not any new thing, but comprehended just that subordinate relation in which the church of New York continues to stand.
It would seem also that you had some Idea of thus understanding the term. You profess your willingness to keep up a "Correspondence" in the way in which it was done before the formation of either of the Assembiles which now exist in New York. It is just this which Classis now seeks, has sought, and will continue to seek. For the organization of distinet Assemblles, as well as the names given to them, did not originate with the Classis, but were suggested by those who have now altogether ceased corresponding with us, as that correspondence was at first conducted, because they wish to separate from the bond of such relationship alto- gether. Now that which Is earnestly striven after by the Conferentle party- which is subordinate to the Classis, Is the preservation of this "Correspondence" in the same way as it has formerly been conducted. This plainly appears from (1) the exchange of letters which we keep up with those brethren; (2) from the requirements of the churches Inpon their ministers], which may be seen, in 80 many words, in the call of Fishkill on Rev. [ Isaac] Rysdyck, which call he has also accepted under his own subscription thereto; and (3) from the grief expressed by the churches of Kingston and Tappan, in that their pastors [ Meyer and Verbryck] set themselves against the wishes of their churches, and, therefore, their "obilga- tions" to Classis are broken.
Is not this your conception of the matter? For we cannot permit ourselves to think that in the use of the word "Correspondence", you should understand any- thing else-anything different from what the Conferentie brethren meant by "subor- dination"; for yon yourself also say that you wish to maintain the "Correspond- ence" In the same way in which It was maintained before the formation of either of the present existing Assemblies, [the Coetus or Conferentle].
Yon will therefore perceive that the advice given to yon [by some] to maintain an Independent attitude, Is a kind of counsel which cannot stand. For it all amounts to this, that you are [as you say] of one mind with the [Conferentie] brethren, who remain under the Classis; but yet In promoting a common aim, you will not consult nor co-operate with them. But this is certainly inconsistent; neither can such counsel help toward the effort to settle the disputes. It is cer- tainly not the ahn of the brethren of the Conferentie, as little as it is the alm of the Classis, to exercise lordship over others: but only to resist those who would exercise such lordshulp, and deprive the churches of their just privileges. It is only our aim to assist those churches which are oppressed or disturbed In the enjoyment of their privileges, whether as to their ecclesiastical rights, or their civil rights, such as the enjoyment of their church property; and such Is also evidently their desire, [the desire of the Conferentie]; because their work, In general, is to main- tain the "Correspondence". All this is evident; because where the churches are left undisturbed in their old relationships, there the ministers live quietly and are at peace with their congregations.
That such is their disposition, is also evident from the following :- because that, wherever there are any of the Coetns brethren, they [the Conferentle] do not meddle with them any more than the Classis does; but they Interfere only in the
OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK.
4055 1766
interests of those churches, where both they and the Classis know that Coetus brethren are seeking to intrude-to draw churches away from the Classis; for such conduct is the cause of violent disputes and commotions. But these things, the Conferentie brethren can endure as little as the Classis. We positively declare that such conduct no one can or should endure, who values his own property and principles. He is in duty bound to resist so long as he is able, if he would not knowingly deprive himself of his own rights.
But then it follows from all this, [some might say] that if one will have noth- ing whatever to do with those brethren with whom he radically disagrees, he thereby works into the hands of that very party. For those who have laid the basis of dispute, make progress through the quietude of their opponents, and thus extend their influence. But, wait, Worthy Brother. Is it not also true that he that is not with us, is against us? and that he that gathereth not with us scat- tereth? Yea, may we not add, that to remain by oneself, taking offence at the word "subordination", and yet to say that one desires to keep up "Correspond- ence" with the Rev. Classis- may we not say that such a one gives out the idea that he understands by "Correspondence" something else than the maintaining of the original arrangement; and that in this, according to your opinion as expressed, you desire no part.
Well, then, Esteemed Brother, will not such prejudice find nourishment, and cause a third party to arise? and will not the dispute thus be made greater, and all the aims of Classis be defeated? Be so good and true then, for the accomplish- ment of your own desires, as to co-operate [with the Classis and the Conferentie.] If there be some things, in some of those brethren, [the Conferentie], which, according to your notion, seem to be improper, why, fraternal Sir, if we under- stand you aright, we perfectly agree with you in that opinion, while we both seek, nevertheless, to maintain and defend the Old constitution of things.
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.