USA > Pennsylvania > Montgomery County > A history of the Goshenhoppen Reformed charge, Montgomery County, Pennsylvania (1727-1819) > Part 6
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
64
History of the Goshenhoppen Charge
pack, Pa., in order to bring the long standing "Reiff Case " to a final settlement. At a conference held at Skip- pack, Weiss submitted the following paper to be signed by his former elders. He did not succeed in getting them to sign it, but they made a copy of his statement, which ultimately fell into the hands of John Philip Boehm, who promptly forwarded it to Holland.69 The statement of Weiss was as follows :
STATEMENT OF WEISS REGARDING MONEY COLLECTED IN HOLLAND.
SCHIPACH, May 8, 1738.
Account, made with J. Reiff, concerning the collected money, which he received in my presence in Holland at Rotterdam, Haar- lem and Amsterdam, from the respective donors, of which he made the following disposition, namely :
Receipts, according to the collection book added together in sum total fl. 2104 .-
Expenditures, being for necessary expenses :
1. For voyage from Philadelphia to London without the provisions taken along £18 .-
2. For provisions in London during about one month, with the duty for myself and Jacob Reiff £5.sh.7.d.6.
3. For passage from London to Rotterdam for each 15sh. sterling, I chini [guinea] for the bed and 3sh. sterl. for the board.
4. Expenses for half a year's board in Holland and necessary travels, 700 Dutch guilders.
5. At Rotterdam, shortly before my return to London, Jacob Reiff gave me 250 Dutch guilders, with which I paid to pas- sage from Rotterdam to London (when J. Reiff remained in Holland, 15sh. one chini [guinea] for the bed, 6sh. for the board.
69 Boehm's copy is in the Pennsylvania Portfolio of the Classical Ar- chives, No. 20.
65
Return of Weiss to America
The passage from London to Maryland £8 .- without the pro- visions taken along.
The journey from Maryland to Philadelphia by sea £3,sh.12,d.I. Board in London 16sh.
In addition for my labor and trouble I ask £50 for the year.
N.B. Jac. Reiff declares to have paid me for clothes and books IIof. 14 stuivers.
When pounds and shillings are referred to, sterling money is meant.
This statement reveals the fact that Weiss stayed in Holland six months. Since he arrived about August 10, 1730, he must have left it about February 10, 1731. Then he returned to Pennsylvania by way of London and Maryland.
Besides collecting about fl. 2100 for the congregations of Philadelphia and Skippack and rousing much interest for the Reformed people in Pennsylvania, the visit of Weiss in Holland had another important result. It led to the publication of the first printed report regarding the Reformed Church in Pennsylvania, which was laid before the Synod of South Holland, convened at Dortrecht from July 3 to 13, 1731, and was ordered printed by that Synod. The minutes of that meeting state regarding it:
MINUTES OF SOUTH HOLLAND SYNOD ON REFORMED CHURCH IN PENNSYLVANIA, JULY 3-13, 1731.
The Reverend Deputies of the Synod reported, that, in obedience to the resolution of Synod, they had gathered full information, with the assistance of the commissioners of the Reverend Classes of Delft and Delftland as well as of Schieland, from the lips of Do. Georgius Michael Weitzius, minister at Philadelphia and from his elder, who have come over hither [to Holland],70 as well as from
70 This statement proves that the "Berigt" of 1731 was based on the reports of Weiss, but it was not actually written by him, as has been stated
6
66
History of the Goshenhoppen Charge
thorough reports and letters, regarding the condition of the churches in Pensylvania, which consist of 30,000 baptized members, among whom are about 15,000 [adult] members. They were served hitherto by only one minister, namely the aforesaid Do. Weitz, besides by another, Philippus Beem [Boehm], who, however, has had no [preparatory] studies nor a call, but was forced upon the congregation rather than elected by it. They are now busy with the building of a stone church with materials from that country. They will need in course of time at different places four other churches, together with a minister and schoolmaster for each. . . .
Furthermore, the Reverend Deputies read before Synod a draught of a church order [constitution], composed at the express request of the Palatine colonists in Pennsylvania, by their Reverences together with the Commissioners of the Classis of Delft and Delft- land, as well as those of Schieland, which according to their opinion (subject to correction) can be introduced to a large extent into the distant churches, in harmony with the usages of the Pala- tinate ..
The Christian Synod is of the opinion that the Reverend Depu- ties and Commissioners of the Classes of Delft, Delftland and Schieland ought to be thanked for the trouble and efforts expended in this far-reaching affair and for the draught of a church order which has been read.
This draught should be printed as quickly as possible, so that during the sessions of this Synod71 their Reverences, the correspond- ing delegates as well as the members of Synod, may be provided with copies and thus be better able to express their opinion regard- ing it, that if necessary, the draught may be changed or amended and then be sent as soon as possible to the congregation [in Penn- sylvania]. The commisioners for this affair shall put such a title repeatedly. There is reason to think that the author of the "Berigt " was the Rev. John Wilhelmius, see Life and Letters of Boehm, p. 306, note 190.
71 The Synod at which all these events happened was the Synod of Dort- recht (or Dort), held in 1731, and not the Synod of Breda of 1730, as has been stated by Dr. Good in his History of the Reformed Church in the United States, p. 136, and repeated by Dr. Corwin, Manual of the Re- formed Church in America, 4th ed., p. 897.
67
Report and Instructions
or statement upon it as shall make it evident that this draught is only an advice or counsel which the Deputies of this Synod, to- gether with the Commissioners of Delft, Delftland and Schieland, drew up at the request preferred to them, so that no suspicion may be provoked by it. This was done and the copies [of the draught] were handed over to the members present and to each Classis, according to the number they had asked for.
Copies of this printed report have come down to us. One was bought by the writer in Holland for his friend, the Rev. Prof. J. I. Good, D.D. It is entitled:
Berigt, / en / Onderrigtinge, / nopens en aan de Colonie / en Kerke / van / Pensylvanien. / Opgestelt en Uytgegeven door de Gedeputeerden van / de E. Christelyke Synodus van Zuyd-Holland, / benevens de Gecommitteerden van de / E. Classis von Delft en Delfsland, / en Schieland.
Title page, one page of introduction and 18 pages of text, in small quarto.
The title reads in English :
Report and Instructions, concerning and for the Colony and Church of Pennsylvania. Prepared and published by the Deputies of the Rev. Christian Synod of South Holland, together with the Commissioners of the Rev. Classis of Delft, Delftland and Schie- land.
As the title indicates the booklet consists of two parts : (1) a report, covering five pages, (2) an instruction for the regulation of the churches there, pp. 6-18.
The report gives a brief description of Pennsylvania, its location, climate, nature of soil, products, metals and inhabitants. It then traces its history from the first occu- pation of the country by the Swedes, to its surrender to the English in 1665 and its acquisition by Penn in 1681. It refers to the establishment of Philadelphia and the efforts of Penn to attract settlers to the colony. It states that
68
History of the Goshenhoppen Charge
many inhabitants of Germany were attracted to Pennsyl- vania, Mennonites, Lutherans and Reformed, but that the last were nearly half of the whole population or about 15,000. This is, of course, a greatly exaggerated figure. Of the Reformed people it is said that, being without reli- gious services, many had gone over to the Quakers. Four years ago [1727] their first minister had arrived, Weiss, under whom they had formed a congregation at Skippack, but that one minister and one church was not sufficient for the widely scattered Reformed settlers. Therefore they needed the help of the Reformd Church of the Nether- lands. With their help even the Indians might be reached and converted. The log church at Skippack should be replaced by one of stone and four additional churches should be erected.
The second part of the pamphlet, called instruction, proposes the complete organization of the Church in Penn- sylvania, looking forward even to the formation of a Classis, but demanding of its ministers subscription to all the formulas of unity, adopted by the Synod of Dort, in- cluding the Heidelberg Catechism, Belgic Confession, De- crees as well as Post-Acta of the Synod of Dort.
Two remarkable facts should be noted with regard to this proposed constitution for the Reformed churches of Pennsylvania. The first is that it exerted absolutely no influence upon the constitutional history of the Reformed Church. Mr. Boehm clung tenaciously to his own consti- tution, drawn up in 1725, which had been permitted by the Classis of Amsterdam in 1729, and which became the con- stitution of the Coetus of Pennsylvania in 1748. The other fact is that the opponents of Boehm circulated an interpolated manuscript copy of this constitution, written it was claimed by Do. Wilhelmius in Rotterdam, which
69
Certificate of Philadelphia Church
declared that the church in Pennsylvania was an altogether independent church and could choose as their ministers whomsoever they pleased. Through this letter the oppo- nents of Boehm tried to justify their existence of a sepa- rate organization.72
When Weiss returned to Pennsylvania, in the summer of 1731, he found the churches of Philadelphia and Ger- mantown under the care of another minister and as the Reformed congregation at Huntersfield, Schoharie County, N. Y., gave him a call, he accepted it and removed to the State of New York.73
Before Weiss left Philadelphia, however, he requested and received the following letter of commendation from his elders at Philadelphia. Of this letter, too, he has spread a copy upon the church record at Catskill, from which the writer copied the original German recently. The following is a translation of this certificate :
CERTIFICATE GIVEN TO WEISS BY PHILADELPHIA REFORMED CHURCH.
Copy of the Attestation given to me by my late congregation at Philadelphia in Pennsylvania, after I had received a letter from Schohary, not far from Albany.
Inasmuch as our late pastor, the Rev. Mr. G. M. Weiss, has now resolved to leave Philadelphia and go to Albany, to enter there
72 A copy of this forged letter of Wilhelmius was sent to Amsterdam by Boehm. It is in the Pennsylvania Portfolio of letters at Amsterdam, new letters, No. 10. It is printed in full in Life and Letters of Boehm, PP. 303-311.
73 After a short ministry Weiss left Huntersfield in February, 1732. A testimonial given him at the time of his removal, February 22, 1732, from the Huntersfield congregation, is spread upon the Catskill record. Weiss received and accepted a call from the Dutch Reformed Church at Catskill, N. Y., dated February 8, 1732. He opened the Catskill record on February 25, 1732. His last baptism there was entered into the record July 6, 1735.
70
History of the Goshenhoppen Charge
upon his calling, according to the divine providence, a credible tes- timonial is given him herewith by the congregation here, that, according to the obligations of a minister, he discharged the duties of his office piously, faithfully and diligently and led such a Chris- tian life that the whole congregation was well satisfied with him, as we also wish him the blessing of God for his undertaking. In testimony of which and in the interest of truth we, the elders of the Reformed Congregation, have hereunto set our signatures and affixed our seals.
Given in Philadelphia, the 22nd of September 1731.
JOH. DIEMER, (L.S.)
PIETER LECOLIE (L.S.)
JOHANN WILHELM RÖHRIG (L.S.)
HENRICH WELLER (L.S.)
CONRAD REIFF (L.S.)
GERHARDT IN DE HEFFEN (L.S.)
With this letter Weiss left Philadelphia and went to his new field of labor in the state of New York.
CHAPTER II.
MINISTRY OF REV. JOHN PETER MILLER, 1730-1734.
N August 29, 1730, there appeared in the courthouse of Philadelphia a man who was destined to play a prominent part in the reli- gious life of Pennsylvania. It was John Peter Miller, the later monk at Ephrata, who came to Pennsylvania as a Reformed candidate of theology.
The life of John Peter Miller has often been sketched,74 but no one has ever attempted to gather together all the documents bearing on the few years which he spent as minister of the Reformed Church in Pennsylvania. This shall be our aim, to shed as much light as possible upon his short career as a Reformed minister.
On December 29, 1725, there registered in the matricu- lation book of the University of Heidelberg "Johannes
74 For earlier accounts of Peter Miller see Harbaugh, Fathers of the Reformed Church, Vol. I (1857), pp. 301-311; Dubbs, Historic Manual of the Reformed Church, 1885, pp. 175-187; Good, History of the Reformed Church in the United States, 1725-1792, Reading, 1899, pp. 160-165; Dubbs, Reformed Church in Pennsylvania, 1902, pp. 94-99; Sachse, Ger- man Sectarians of Pennsylvania, Vol. I, passim; also " John Peter Miller " in The Pennsylvania German, Vol. I, No. 2 (April, 1900), pp. 3-17; also Life and Letters of Boehm, pp. 44-48.
71
72
History of the Goshenhoppen Charge
Petrus Mullerus, Altzbornensis." Alsenborn is a village about two and a half German miles northeast of the city of Kaiserslautern, in the Rhenish Palatinate, now a part of Bavaria.
In the Burial Register of the Ephrata Community for the year 1796, John Peter Miller is recorded as having " died September 25, 1796, aged 86 years, 9 months."75 Counting back 86 years and 9 months from the day of his death we are brought to December 25, 1709, as the day of his birth.
Of his life in Germany nothing is known except a brief allusion which occurs in a letter from Ephrata signed K., a letter that was published in the Berliner Monatschrift of 1784, to which the late Prof. Jos. H. Dubbs first called attention.76 After giving a somewhat discouraging ac- count of the condition of the Ephrata community, the writer makes the following reference to Peter Miller :
Peter Miller, the only educated man (in the society) studied in Heidelberg and was authorized to preach, but not to baptize. With thirty guldens in his pocket he left his father. Afterwards he preached in this country, and at the request of a German coun- try congregation was ordained by the Presbyterian clergy of Phila- delphia. After four years he resigned his congregation, was con- verted, baptized others and was himself baptized; and six months after the organization of this society he joined it. Previously he had lived as a hermit.
A correspondence carried on with the Reformed pastor at Alsenborn, shortly before the Great War, brought to light some facts regarding the family of Peter Miller. His father was the Rev. John Müller, who from 1708-14
75 Sachse, The German Sectarians of Pennsylvania, Vol. II, p. 516. This statement is corroborated by the inscription on his tombstone, see below, p. 95.
76 Dubbs, The Reformed Church in Pennsylvania, p. 98, note 99.
73
John Peter Miller
was pastor at Zweikirchen and Wolfstein, near Kaisers- lautern. Later, from 1714-26, he was pastor at Alsen- born, and from 1726-41 pastor at Altenkirchen, near Homburg in the Rhine province. He died at Altenkirchen May 11, 1741. His son, John Peter Müller, must have been born at Zweikirchen, during his father's pastorate at that place. Unfortunately neither the church nor the church records of Zweikirchen are now in existence, so that we are unable to supply further details. However, we now know that the reference to Alsenborn in the ma- triculation book at Heidelberg does not mean that John Peter Müller was born there, but that it was his temporary home, because his father was pastor there, when he matric- ulated in the university.
On August 29, 1730, a list was presented in the court- house at Philadelphia, containing the names of seventy-five men, who with their families making in all about two hun- dred and sixty persons, were imported in the ship Thistle of Glasgow, Colin Dunlap,77 master, having come from Rotterdam, but last from Dover, England, as by clearance from that port. They subscribed the "Declaration of Fidelity and Abjuration." Among these names is "Pe- ter Müller," in bold German characters.
With Miller came a number of persons whom we after- wards find as members of the Reformed Church at Gosh- enhoppen. They are: Valentin Griesemer, Hans Jacob Diehl, Thomas Hamman, Abraham Transu, Hans Simon Mey. Lönhart Hochgenug, Bernhard Siegmund and Jo- hannes Scherer became members of the Reformed Church at Philadelphia and Christian Leman appears in 1734 at Skippack, while John Henrich Schmidt is enrolled in the same year as a Reformed deacon in Falkner Swamp.
77 The correction " Calvin Dunlap " in the Pennsylvania Archives, 2d Ser., Vol. XVII, p. 20, is entirely unjustified.
74
History of the Goshenhoppen Charge
Soon after his arrival Peter Miller came in contact with John Philip Boehm, who was at that time (1730) the only ordained Reformed minister in the province. Miller called on Boehm in his home and had with him a lengthy conversation, of which Boehm sent the following report to Holland, in a letter dated November 12, 1730:78
LETTER OF BOEHM REGARDING MILLER, NOVEMBER 12, 1730.
Meanwhile no peace can yet be expected, for there arrived this fall another man, named Miller, whose father is pastor in the Electoral Palatinate, under the inspectorate of Kaiserslautern. He likewise avails himself of the liberty of this country, and so far has been preaching to the seceders at Schipbach, as the enclosed letter, marked F, shows. He has promised them, as also the people in Philadelphia and Germantown, to take the place of Mr. Weiss until the latter returns. In order to carry this out successfully, he betook himself to the Presbyterians in Philadelphia (because he is unordained), that he might be ordained by them. This he told me himself in my house on October 19th, saying that in the pre- ceeding week he had handed to them his confession of faith con- cerning the points they had asked of him, and expressing the hope that the affair [of his ordination] would be concluded in the fol- lowing week, which so far as I know has not yet taken place.
I warned him in a friendly way and advised him to go to the reverend ministers of New York and endeavor to have his ordi- nation take place in accordance with the church-order of the Re- formed Church, whereby it would stand a better test before the world. To this he replied, that such a course was far too cir- cuitous for him, if he could gain his end by a shorter way, he would take it, as there was no great difference in it. Moreover, he said, he would like to know who had given authority to the Classis of Amsterdam to rule over the Church in this country. He thought the King of England was more important than the Classis of Hol-
78 Journal of P. HI. S., Vol. VII, pp. 36-38; Life and Letters of Boehm, p. 199 f.
75
Boehm on Miller
land. Then I answered that it was asking too much who had given her the authority, and that I did not care anything about that, but that I believed, if the Classis had no such authority she would not have taken us under her care and supervision, that I for one was subject to her and would always be glad to act under her direction, etc. Then I received this fine reprimand: "There is such a glorious liberty in this country that the people themselves are free to elect, accept and also dismiss their preachers. It is not right to attempt to deprive them of this liberty and to subject them to a Classis, which can then force upon them such ministers as she desires. Christians have liberty and are in this world under no head, Christ alone is their head in heaven."
He also remarked that the people had called me only temporarily, until they could get another minister. I showed him my call. He said there was nothing in it, that they had called me for life. Then I answered him: "The Reverend Classis had recognized it as a lawful call, if he was wiser than the Classis, he would have to take it up with her. I furthermore reminded him, that I also regarded Christ as the head of his church, yet I believed that Christ ruled his church on earth through agents, wherefore I would rather be under supervisors divinely appointed, in order to preserve good order in the Church of Christ, than stand up on my own freedom." On this point he did not agree with me.
It is interesting to see the difference in the character of these two men, thrown into such strong relief in this con- versation. Boehm methodical, exact, strong for order and church government, firmly attached to the customs and traditions of the fathers, seeing in them the safeguards of the Church. Miller, easy-going, chafing under restraint, glad to be free from the restrictions of the old world, car- ing little for traditions and customs, or even for the visible Church. To his sanguine temperament the ideal and spir- itual alone appeals. He thinks of the liberty of the chil- dren of God and the glory of the invisible Church. This
76
History of the Goshenhoppen Charge
conversation furnishes us therefore the key to his later conversion.
The elders of Skippack, writing with Mr. Boehm to the Reformed ministers of New York, under date November 5, 1730 (in the enclosure, marked F, referred to the above), make the following statement about Miller :79
The harmful division, caused in our congregation by Mr. George Michael Weiss and continued by him until his departure from here, contrary to all order and the solemn covenant made with him, all this has hitherto been kept up by Mr. Miller, who came to this country this fall. Coming into this country as an unordained minister and willing to be ordained by the Presbyterians in Phila- delphia (as we hear), we have no other prospect before us but a continuous division in our poor congregation. Our hope for a good and God-pleasing harmony, established in brotherly love, which we expected to be able to report with rejoicing, after the departure of Mr. Weiss, has been entirely taken away from us through the above mentioned Mr. Miller.
The same unwillingness which the people of Skippack manifested to submit themselves to the supervision of the Classis of Amsterdam, appeared also in Philadelphia, under the inspiration of Weiss and Miller, for Boehm writes again :80
With respect to the Reformed people of Philadelphia, I have been compelled to hear repeatedly, with a sad heart, from several of them the reply, (when I recommended the good work to them) : " We are here in a free country, and the Classis of Holland has no right to give us any orders." This statement, however, has been prompted, as I believe, by the persuasion of Mr. Weis alone, which is now continued by Mr. Miller.
It is rather curious to see how eager these independents 79 Journal of P. H. S., Vol. VII, p. 59; Life and Letters of Boehm, p. 219. 80 Journal of P. II. S., Vol. VII, p. 44; Life and Letters of Boehm, p. 205.
77
-
Ordination of Miller
were to accept the benefactions of the Classis of Amster- dam, but when it came to accept their well meant advice, they drew the line. Consistency, thou art a jewel !
ORDINATION OF MILLER IN PHILADELPHIA.
We must now turn to the story of Miller's ordination by the Presbyterians in Philadelphia.
On September 19, 1730, the Presbyterian Synod of Philadelphia passed the following resolution :81
It is agreed by Synod, that Mr. John Peter Miller, a Dutch pro- bationer, lately come over, be left to the care of the Presbytery of Philadelphia to settle him in the work of the ministry.
Unfortunately the minutes of the Philadelphia Pres- bytery from 1717 to 1732 are lost, so that it is impossible to give the exact details. A well known letter of Rev. Jedidiah Andrews, from 1698 to 1747 pastor of the old Buttonwood Presbyterian Church, supplies the omission partially. It was written on October 14, 1730, to his friend, the Rev. Thomas Prince, pastor of the Old South Church of Boston. In it he writes :82
There is lately come over a Palatine candidate of the ministry, who having applied to us at the Synod, for Ordin'n, 't is left to 3 ministers to do it. He is an extraordinary person for sense and learning. We gave him a question to discuss about Justification, and he has answered it, in a whole sheet of paper, in a very notable manner. His name is John Peter Miller, and speaks Latin as readily as we do our vernacular tongue, and so does the other, Mr. Weis.
Many years afterwards Peter Miller himself wrote the following account of his ordination to a friend in a letter dated December 5, 1790:83
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.