1. If persons would not give this price, they might have them for twenty shillings less per acre, otherwise the farm should remain in the possession of the Church.

2. Terms of payment should be made in four equal sums; the first, due on delivery of the deed, which shall be on or before the 1st of April next; the 2nd on the first day of May 1757; and the third and fourth in the following years, 1758 and 1759. The buyer shall give three bonds for the last three installments with a mortgage on the land, for security.

3. The sale shall be made by the entire body of the Consistory, or else by a lawfully authorized Committee of a majority of the

same.

Signed in name of all. Datum as above.
J. Ritzema.

CORRESPONDENCE FROM AMERICA.

The Opponents of an American Classis to the Classis of Amsterdam, Sept. 30, 1755.

Portfolio "New York", Vol. ii.

Extracts, xxiii, 427.

To the Very Rev. Classis of Amsterdam.

Very Rev. Sirs, Fathers and Brethren:

Your Revs.' letter, together with the Acts of the Synod of North Holland, 1754, we have received. We assure your Revs. of our grateful acknowledgement, and send your Revs. at this time the Acts of the Coetus, held last September, 1754. We had indeed, in our last letter, promised to send them to your Revs. in the spring; but to our sorrow, we were prevented from doing so. We consider ourselves, at present, obliged to inform your Revs. of that fact.

Your Revs. will understand, from the Acts of the Coetus, that a resolution was carried to get the Coetus changed into a Classis; and that to that end Circular Letters were sent to the churches for the purpose of obtaining their consent. Their answers were to be sent to four Commissioners, and by these to be, one and all, forwarded.

When Rev. Theodore Frielinghuysen, of Albany, came to know this, as also some other things, he threw the whole thing into confusion, by going personally through the congregations in the two Provinces of New York and New Jersey. He took 11 or 12 weeks for it, without the consent of his consistory, and committed other irregularities which it is too tedious to relate. It is also not necessary, as we know that your Revs. must have been informed of them. His object was, the setting up, not only a Classis, but also an Academy for the Dutch. To this a number of churches, either innocently or with some object in view, gave their consent; and, not once thinking what was their bounden duty as members of the Coetus, with the exception of two or three, refused to send in their answer. So, they, together with Rev. Frielinghuysen, have broken up the Coetus. Also, on the 27th of May, 1755, they held a meeting at New York. By stratagem, they obtained the documents of the Coetus. Contrary to our laws, they received members into that Assembly, without having given proper notice thereof, beforehand to any members. So they have set up, again, among themselves alone, a Coetus, having first broken up [the old body.] They pass resolutions and appoint committees to carry out their matters seeking thereby to bring everything into confusion.

1755

1755

Since, now, we understand that Rev. Frielinghuysen has been commissioned by his brethren to secure his object directly from the Synod, we, the undersigned, ministers and elders, fell ourselves obliged to send our protest also direct to the Synod, and we hope that your Revs. will do all in your power to support us in i matter.

United as we are in this, we know, also, that Revs. Marinus and Schuyler perfectly one with us. We, therefore, most humbly request that your Revs ar recognize and write us, as such, [as a separate body, the Conferentie] in erger that, in a friendly and fraternal way, we may continue our correspondence, for 1promoting of those things which are for the welfare of our churches; especist, because we understand that Rev. Frielinghuysen and his followers mean to etinue their illegal meetings.

With this we close, praying God for His blessing upon your Revs.' persons i weighty ministries. With much respect we sign ourselves, Very Rev. Sirs, Your Revs.' obedient servants and fellow-brethren,

Anthonius Curtenius, V. D. M.
Gerard Haeghoort, V. D. M.
Johannis Ritzema, V. D. M.
Lambertus de Ronde, V. D. M.

Benj. Van de Linde, V. D. M.

New York, Sept. 30, 1755.

Jacobus Peck
Arya de Groot

Cornelis Leydecker
Benjamin Westervelt

P. S. Very Rev. Sirs: In order to avoid rewriting, we have taken the libert mention in our letter to the Synod, that Revs. Curtenius and Ritzema gave to Classis of Amsterdam a circumstantial account in which we fully acquiesce T kindly request, therefore, that that letter be sent along with the Correspondent the Synod, in order that that Very Rev. Church Assembly may be fully convie of the fairness of our protest. [See letter of Sept. 3, 1755.]

ACTS OF THE CLASSIS OF AMSTERDAM.

Arondeus.

1755, Oct. 6th. Art. 4., ad 6. Rev. John Arondeus having appeared before the Assembly. On the pre-advice of the Messrs Deputies on this affair, the following resolution, with respect the documents now handed back to him, was adopted, and re to him:

"Rev. Arondeus having requested of the Rev. Classis of Ar sterdam, that a certain document, together with still anotherthe two presented as a dismissal and certificate-might be 2tested by the Classis: the Classis caused the back-Acta to b examined by a committee on this business. Everything havi been maturely considered, the Classis is of the opinion that th writers and subscribers of those documents were not qualified i give the dismissal; also that their testimony is at variance wit the truth, since the conduct of Rev. Arondeus has been far fro edifying, as well as from tending to the pure maintenance discipline. Therefore the Classis judges (decides) that this re quest of Rev. Arondeus cannot be granted, nor can he be per

mitted to preach or to perform any of the other duties of the Sacred Ministry. Done at our Classical gathering, within Amsterdam, October 6, 1755. xiii. 73, 74.

Theodore van Schelluynen, V. D. M.

Hoc tempore, Clerk.

His papers were accordingly returned to him, and the above was noted thereon, for the information of all those to whom the same might be shown. xiii. 73, 74.

ACTS OF THE CLASSIS OF AMSTERDAM, OCT. 6, 1755.
Report of the Committee in the Case of Rev. Arondeus.

(See Sept. 3.)

The Committee in the Case of J. Arondeus, having diligently examined the former Acts of Classis relating to his case, have carefully pondered them, and present the following pre-advice to Classis:

Section 1.

They lay down, as a foundation, that there have been brought in, against Arondeus, other and later accusations, upon which the Classis has already passed judgment.

I. The old accusations are of the years 1747 and 1748.

Of these, father (Gualterus) Du Bois mentions several in a letter written in the name of Coetus, on December 12, 1748. Extract 54, page 115; and, especially:

1. Abandoning the village of Gravesend, without reason. 2. Omitting to call on several members in house visitation. 3. The electing of members of Consistory, without prayer or thanksgiving.

4. Presumptuous speech in the pulpit.

5. The violation of his call, and the alteration of a rent bill (huurceel, lease?) of two years.

6. The declining of a call, without (good) reasons.

To some of these, replies were made in a letter from John Lott, Leffert Leffertse,

...

on Long Island, Jan. 10,

1755

1755

1749. Extr. No. 68, p. 180. Then there is No. 5. This, the Committee considers very important, being acknowledged by hir and his friends, and laid down by the Rev. Classis as a basis for its action. It is as follows:

1. The unlawful and disorderly running from one church to another, having in view possibly temporal advantage. See Recor Book of our letters, Vol. I. Nos. 107, 108. He went from Long Island to Raritan in 1747, in a private manner, and without any ecclesiastical separation. Extract 54, p. 116.

2. His removing did not take place without evidence of fanaticism, or of a temperament which is greatly inclined thereto: unless that story of the moving of the ground, in answer to his prayers, by which he concluded that it was God's will that he should go to Albany was a complete invention; but this is still worse. See Extract, 68. This was accounted as a second objec tion, and was transmitted, in writing, by his own friends, who were wishing to defend him.

3. The equally unlawful intruding of himself back into his former church on Long Island. This is the third accusation.

(1). He returned thither (to Long Island, from Raritan) in July. 1748, without any dismission, at the request of only some, ani in spite of, and against the protest of many families; beginning his ministry at New Utrecht and (new) Amersfoort. Extracts. 54, p. 116.

(2). Even as also he wishes to put forward a document, signed by four elders, who were appointed, it must be remembered, by himself, eight months after his return from Raritan, as a lawful call to the Church of Jamaica. (Thus it reads in the Record Book, Vol. I, No. 107; but there is probably an error in the writing; for Jamaica belongs in Queens County. Arondeus in that county removed the consistory, but was not himself a minister there. Therefore one should read: to the church of Kings County.) See Record Book, No. 107, Vol. I.

4. The fourth charge is illegal actions in the church of Long Island; in particular, with respect to Revs. Van Sinderen, Ritzema, and the Coetus; to wit:

(1). That on October 2, 1748, the lock of the church door at Flatbush was violently broken off and possession taken of the church. The same thing occurred on Jan. 21, 1749, at New Amersfoort; and thereupon Rev. Arondeus brought an elder and two deacons to the pulpit. The latter called off, at New Breukelen, on March 14, 1749, the names of some new members, and chose a Deacon from them, before he had ever partaken of the communion. Extract, 109, p. 19 A.

(2). That he had chosen members of consistory at Breukelen and New Utrecht, and thereby had deprived Van Sinderen of his collectors, (betaals-heeren; or betaals-hurn, salary:) after they had unecclesiastically deposed him. Extract 69.

(3). That he wrote a letter to Rev. Ritzema, in September, 1750, whereof a copy may be found in our extracts, No. 109, p. 207, of an offensive character. He says in this: "That the Classis had not written to him, but had advised and requested his Consistory to leave the case to the Coetus. The Consistory thereupon had replied, through Captain Garrison, that he (Arondeus?) had nothing to do with the Coetus, and that they would never have any dealings therewith, or subject themselves to it; and if Coetus had any desire to use force, they would oppose themselves in like manner, without regard to wine (?) or the pouring out of blood, or even death."

(4). That when Rev. Ritzema came, with the elder Banckert, to the house of Arondeus, in order to make peace, the latter had said: "If he had not left it to the Lord, he would rudely chase away Ritzema, as one who had forgotten honor and God. He ignored Ritzema and wished to have no arguments. He said, further, that it was too late to make peace, since many had cursed it and others had forfeited it." This is testified in these same words by his friends in a letter written in his defense; in which also occur more and similar indecent and vituperative expressions of the writers, against our clerk. Signed, Queens County, April 7, 1750, by H. E. Justus; (Justice?) A. Polhemus, Justus, and D. Ditmars, J. Noordstrand. Extracts, 113; p. 212.

1755