1760 reflections, if perchance they might be of some use in promoting what is necessary for peace. Such a peaceful Reunion might be urged also with many arguments, of which! made brief mention at the beginning of this little tract, and on which I will not now enlarge. I only pray God that He may cause it to prosper. As regards myself, I can only say in the words of Maccabeus: "If I have done my work well and as becometh a History"-being an effort for Peace, but with d regard for right and Liberty-"I have fulfilled my desire; but if I have done Indifferently and tamely, it is the best that I could do." 2 Macc. 15:39.* success. ACTS OF THE CLASSIS OF AMSTERDAM. Rev. Le Fevre asks for his Dismissal. 1760, Sept. 1st. Art. 1. Rev. Eliah Le Fevre, minister in the French language at Paramarabo, finds himself unable, on account of continued illness, to perform any longer his work there with He has conducted himself while there, in every respect in a praise-worthy manner, as appears from several written testimonials. He also now shows his dismissal from the said church, and requests also the dissolution of his relation thereto, by the Classis. The Classis finding all the testimonials satisfactory and in debita forma, grants his request, and orders its clerk to give him laudable dismissal. xiii. 256. Prof. Curtenius will let his book be approved at Leyden. 1760, Sept. 1st. Art. 7. Prof. Curtenius makes known that the treatise on Deut. 33 and 34, which he is about to publish, he will hand over for approbation to the Theological Faculty at Leyden. xiii. 258. ACTS OF THE CLASSIS OF AMSTERDAM. Letters. 1760, Oct. 6th. Art. 6. There came in a letter from the Consistory of Colombo, in which the state of that church was reported A letter from New York, signed by such persons as designate themselves the Coetus. Also a letter from the so-called Conferentie meeting. The original words of the Vulgate are as follows: "Et si vuidem bene, et ut historiae competit, hoc et ipse velim: sin autem minus digne, concedendum est mihi." The Classis having learned the contents of those letters, and hearing the pre-advice of the Messrs. Depp., is of the opinion: 1. That the Rev. Depp. should insist most strenuously upon the reunion of the members who call themselves the Coetus, and of those who constitute the so-called Conferentie meeting. 2. That the majority of votes (in any meeting) must prevail, with the condition that to protesting members an appeal to Classis is open. 3. That the promotions [or ordinations] already made, are not indeed approved, but for the sake of peace, the Classis prefers to connive at them. 4. That the Classis cannot give the Coetus the privilege of examinations, which belongs only to a lawful Classis; but if any extraordinary case occur, the Classis is indeed willing to exercise every indulgence, in order on being informed of such cases, to act pro re nata. The Coetus, however, in such cases must honestly give a laudable testimonial concerning such a person, both as to his fitness, and knowledge in Sacred Theology. But this indulgence of Classis will not be exercised so long as Coetus is not properly a united body in itself, in the bonds of love, peace, and unity. xiii. 260, 261. ACTS OF THE DEPUTIES. ABOUT OCTOBER, 1760. Extract from a letter of Rev. Gerardus Haaghoort to the Classis of Amsterdam, dated May 13, 1760. (In Vol. 33, page 30. No. 293.) Letter to the Classis of Amsterdam, signed by Rev. Gerard Haaghoort, at Second River, in East Jersey, May 13, 1760. The Rev. writer mentions the fact that, at the request of the Coetus, they had all, in accordance with the last letter from the Classis, assembled together. (May 6, 1760.) The writer, as the oldest member of the Conferentie Assembly, expressed his advice, to the effect that they should reunite themselves in a Coetus, on the former basis, and then leave it to the Classis to promote, according to its promises, the welfare of the New (York and New) Jersey churches. 1760 1760 The first article of this advice was adopted, that is, in the Conferentie Assembly. But two other articles had been added namely that weighty matters should not be settled by a mere majority vote, but be left to the decision of the Classis; and that those individuals who had been promoted by the Coetus should not be recognized by the Conferentie Assembly until those who had the right and power had declared them legal members. The Coetus, in order to unite on the former basis, adopted the first of these articles very willingly; but it could not give is consent to the second, as being contrary to Church Order. The settling of weighty matters by a majority vote had taken place in the previous meetings of Coetus also a procedure which the writer of this letter declares to be a fact, and in which he justies the Coetus. The Coetus had also urged Union, because, when once reunited, it could work to better advantage for improvement, that is, for the improvement of the fundamental regulations of the Coetus. This last item the writer does not approve. third, the Coetus rejected utterly, maintaining its right of making promotions, desiring to promote, not in the name of the Classis, but in the name of God. Its understanding is that its subordination to the Classis does not go beyond correspondence and consultation with the Classis, and appeals to the same. The So the work for reunion was broken off. All are, indeed, still in favor of it, but they differ as to the manner of it. They are all agreed in asserting their right and power to promote; but, as to the second point, he says, they differ: the Conferentie Assembly is willing to unite, with subordination to the Classis; the Coetus on the contrary, only upon the basis given above. This difference the Classis will have to settle. His Rev. had his advice, as reported, so framed as to be, he thought, most acceptable to both parties, and in agreement with the careful and wise judgment of the Classis. It is further said, that the Coetus was inclined thereto—that is, to unite; and that the leading members of it had, as delegates. expressed themselves in the Conference to the effect that it was possible to have such a union take place, and other members of the Coetus had declared that his advice was in closest agreement with the letter of the Classis, and that it was a pity that they did not unite themselves. Yea, the entire Coetus had further testified that they desired this union from their very hearts, and would leave all the rest to the Classis, that it might direct the matter for the best interest of the churches. But all this was rejected by the Conferentie Assembly. Wherefore, the writer also had not fallen in with the judgment of that Assembly, and had, therefore, separated himself from it, by saying that he would for himself write to the Classis. This he did, and gives, besides, other reasons for his separation. He could indeed bring in some weighty objection against some persons, but he leaves that for a more favorable opportunity, in the hope that the union may yet be effected. He gives, also, as reasons for his change in this matter,namely, of his being now so much in favor of the union, whereas formerly, as in a letter to Professor Arsenius, he had declared that he would never come into that Assembly-first his yielding disposition; secondly, his confidence in the Classis-that, namely, when their Assembly was once again united, the Classis would set it on a better footing. To this end, he wishes the Classis God's grace and the anointing of the Holy Spirit. Finally, the writer excuses himself, in case he had been somewhat lengthy-that seemed to be somewhat natural to his Rev. He deplored, besides, the public correction of his bad spelling; and asks for a new spelling book, that he may learn how to improve; although he fears that he has now become to old for that. He closes with congratulations. He asks, in a postscript, whether it were not possible for the Rev. Classis to recognize the power of approval and consent (to the Acts of the Coetus?) EXTRACT FROM A LETTER OF THE COETUS, PER REVS. ERICKSON 1760 1760 After greeting the Classis, they mention that they received our brief letter, besides those enclosed to the respective Consistories. The latter they have delivered. Their action in the matter (is then given), and the result. 1. A special Coetus was called which met on the first Tuesday in May. Notice thereof had also been given to the members of a body which calls itself a Conferentie Assembly. These, however, refused to appear in our Coetus, but requested that they migh: speak with some committee. 2. The Coetus having appointed a committee to meet these dis senters, the committee found only ministers but no elders. They received these preliminary Articles as the condition of union: namely, (a) That, when in weighty matters a difference should arise, the decision should rest with the Classis. (b) That they disapprove of the promotion of students, as well as of what had already taken place, as appears from the accompanying document, No. 3. 3. To this the Coetus replied as per document, No. 4, to this effect: (a) That the Coetus was glad to learn that those brethren were willing to unite again with the Coetus on the former basis; but (b) That it found, to its sorrow, that the second point made by them was too much at variance with the first, for the fact was that the Coetus had, on that old basis, decided matters by majority vote, according to the 31st Article* of the Church Order; (c) And as to the third article, it was sorry that the brethren disapproved of the examination and promotion of sudents, as the Coetus is ready to show the legality thereof according to the salutary form of government of the Reformed Church. 4. After a fruitless discussion of these points, the members of the Conferentie Assembly asked the Coetus to take this matter once more under consideration. This was done, with the result Article 31. If any person conceive himself aggrieved by the decision of a lesser Assembly, he shall have the right and liberty of appealing to a higher: and that which is determined by a majority of voices in such Assembly, shall be held decisive and binding unless it can be demonstrated to be contrary to the Word of God and these Articles. |