PRINCETON, N. J "^icxn/c^/ A. Uh^ Cvu.i^'i'-f'i— . 5,.,-,, V, , &-&.4.4... .9//^//-. Xumbi'v.^^Q.'^^.} HISTORY OP THE REFORMED CHURCH IN THE UNITED STATES. 1725—1792. BY REV. PROF. JAMES I. GOOD, D. D., Author of the " Origin of the Reformed Church in Germany," " History of the Keformed Church of Germany," "Rambles Round Reformed Lands," and " Historical Handbook of the Reformed Church in the U.S." READING, PA.: DANIEL MILLER, PUBLISHER. 1899. Entered, according to Act of Congress, in the year 1S99, BY REV, JAMES I. GOOD, D. D., In the OflSce of the Librarian of Congress, at Washington. PREFACE The present volume is the culmination of years of search. The author's previous volumes on the history of the Reformed Church of Germany were gathered in seeking to find the mater- ial for this volume. In 1893, at the suggestion of Rev. Dr. Corwin, the distinguished historian of the Dutch Reformed Church, the author was led to write to Amsterdam to know what records of the German Reformed Church in this country were there. But the price demanded for copying them was so high that the matter was dropped. In 1895 the author visited Amsterdam and arranged to have the Amsterdam correspon- dence copied, but was somewhat disappointed at getting only two of the missing coetus' minutes. In 1896, at the suggestion of Mr. Henry S. Dotterer, of Philadelphia, he visited the archives at the Hague, and there found the missing coetus' minutes, together with a multitude of other correspondence. As far as he knows he was the first minister of our denomina- tion to see these treasures at Amsterdam and also at the Hague. Afterward with the aid of his esteemed colleague, Rev. Prof. W. J. Hinke, he was able to get these manuscripts copied. The same kind of search was made in Switzerland, Germany and England with surprising results, until we can reasonably say that most of the early history of our Church is clear. The author is under obligations to Mr. Overmann, the librarian of the General Synod of the Hague; Rev. Dr. Vos, clerk of the classis of Amsterdam ; Rev. Mr. Thompson, pas- tor of the English Reformed church of Amsterdam ; Mr. Escher, of Zurich ; Prof. Bloesch, of Berne ; Prof. Braun, of IV PREFACE. Hauau ; Rev. Mr. Kennedy, of Edinburgh ; Rev. G. W. Matthews, of London, and the British Museum for aid given. Also on this side of the Atlantic he is indebted to Rev. Dr. Corwin, Mr. Jordan and the Pennsylvania Historical Society of Philadelphia ; Rev. Bishop Levering, of Bethlehem ; Rev. Dr. A. DuBois, the late Rev. Prof D. Demarest, Rev. Dr. D. Van Pelt, Rev. W. Toennes, Mr. H. S. Dotterer, and especially to the Theological Seminary of New Brunswick, with its librarian, Mr. Van Dyke, for the loan of rare origi- nals, and to Rev. Prof. Hinke for his researches in the early lives of our ministers, and among the matriculation books of the universities abroad, and also for his examination of the manuscripts of this book. The author has had a great deal of difficulty about the spelling of proper names, which differed so greatly in the man- uscripts, also about some of the dates, on account of the differ- ence between old and new style, also about the value of money, as the value of a Pennsylvania pound varied so much. He had taken a pound as equal to $2.40, except in the Holland donations, where he took it to be $2.60. He trusts that the critics will judge leniently, as this book was prepared under the great press of duties caused by his double position as pas- tor and professor of Dogmatics in Ursinus College. He will be glad for suggestions and corrections, as he feels that much still remains to be found about our early church history. Even while the printing of this book was in progress, Pro- fessor Hinke has located the first German Reformed church of America in Virginia. (See Appendix 11.) Tiie mate- rial on wliich he has had to work proved so abundant that he has had to limit his work to the coetus. Hence the lives of ministers after 1793 are merely sketched, not given in full. This book is sent out with the hope tliat it may aid the ministers and members of the Reformed Church in the United States to more historic consciousness, and a greater a])precia- tion and ])roper pride of their history. CONTENTS. CHAPTER I. Forerunners of the German Reformed Church. A. — The Refonued of South America, Section 1. The French Reformed in Brazil Page 3 Section 2. The Dutch Reformed in Brazil 12 B. — The Reformed in North America. Sections. The French Reformed Settlement in Florida 17 Section 4. The Dutch Reformed in New Amsterdam 26 Section 5. The Palatinate Settlement in New York 31 Section 6. The Swiss Emigration to Carolina 52 • CHAPTER II. The Period Before Congregational Organization (1710-1725). Section 1. The Dutch Preparation 62 Section 2. Rev. Samuel Guldin 68 Section 3. The Early Life of Boehm 89 CHAPTER III. The Church Under Congregational Organization (1725-1747). Section 1. The Early Labors of Boehm 100 Section 2. Conrad Tempelman 108 Section 3. Rev. George Michael Weiss and the Founding of the Philadel- phia Congregation 1 13 Section 4. The Ordination of Boehm 120 Section 5. The Journey of Weiss and Reiff to Europe 134 Section 6. Weiss' Labors in New York 144 Section 7. The ReiflF Accounts 153 VI CONTENTS. Section 8. Rev. John Peter Miller 1C>0 Section 9. Rev. John Bartholomew Rieger 166 / Section 10. The Goetschis— Father and Son 171 Section 11. Rev. Peter Ilenry Dorsius 190 Section 12. The Synods of the Congregation of God in the Spirit 200 Section 13. The Reformed Opponents of the Congregation of God in the Spirit 220 Section 14. The Reformed Ministers in the Union 2.33 Section 15. The Independents 249 Section 16. Brohm's Later Labors 205 Section 17. The Efforts of the Holland Synods and Classes to Aid the Penn- sylvania Keformed 279 / Section 18. The Early Life of Schlatter 294 Section 19. Schlatter's Labors Before the First Coetus .310 CHAPTER IV. The Chitrch Under Svnodical Government (1747-1755). Section 1. The First Coetus .331 Section 2. Schlatter's Labors Between the First and Second Coetus 344 Sections. The Second Coetus 352 Section 4. Events Between the Second and Third Coetus 359 Section 5. The Third Coetus 371 Section 6. The Schlatter and Steiner Controversy in Philadelphia 376 Section 7. Schlatter's Trip to Europe (1751-1752) 391 Sections. The Rubel Controversy... 412 Section 9. Schlatter and the Charity Schools 435 Section 10. Schlatter's Life After Leaving the Coetus 460 Section 11. The Attempted Union with the Presbyterians and the Dutch Reformed 473 Section 12. The New Ministers 490 Section 13 The Independents 516 CHAPTER V. The Coeti.s i;i' to the Revoution (1755-1775) Section 1. The Reformed in (.'ivil Affairs 524 Section 2. The Philadelphia Congregation 531 CONTENTS. VII Section 3. The Members of the Coetus 540 Section 4. The Independents 585 Section 5. Pietism in the Early Church 51)2 Section 6. The Baltimore Congregation 597 Section 7. The Death of Weiss 602 CHAPTER Vr. The Coetus During the Revolution (1770-1783). Section I. The Coetus and Civil Affairs 605 Section 2. The Ecclesiastical Affairs During the Revolution 618 Sections. The New iMinisters 622 CHAPTER VII. The Coetus after the Revolution (1783-1793). Section 1. The Ministers of the Coetus 630 Section 2. The Independents 644 Section 3. The United Brethren Church and the Re''ormed 050 Section 4. The Causes of the Separation 659 Section 5. The Holland Donations 606 Section 6. Summary — The Position of the Coetus in Doctrine, Cultus and Church Government 674 APPENDIX I. The First Reformed Congregation in America 687 APPENDIX II. Table of Coetus' Meetings and Officers 690 APPENDIX III. Andrew Loretz 692 ERRATA 692 INDEX 693 ILLUSTRATIONS. Hochstadt and the Reformed Church of Worms Opposite page 90 Weinheim, Eppingen and St. Qall " " 112 Cloister Church at the Hague and New Church at Amster- dam " " 282 Tempelman's House and the Reformed Church at Philadel- phia " " 334 HISTORY OF THE REFORMED CHURCH IN THE UNITED STATES. CHAPTER I. FORERUNNERS OF THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH. The forerunners of the German Reformed Church in Pennsylvania were the French and the Dutch. It is, however, to be placed to the credit of the Germans that the first colony ever planted in America was German. The king of Spain mortgaged South America (all the America known to him) to the great German banking houses of the Welzers and Fuggers in return for their financial aid in colonizing and developing the new world. Thus Welzer, a wealthy merchant of Augsburg, obtained a grant of territory from Emperor Charles V., and in 1526 he sent three ships with 500 soldiers and a company of traders to South America. This colony erected a fort and laid out a town. Tli rough the later separation of Germany from Spain and the death of Charles V., the 1 2 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IX U. S. colony was finally broken up after it had existed for thirty years. But its memorial still remains in South America in Venezuela, which is the Spanish for Welzerland. It is also interesting to notice that not only were the first colonists Germans, but that the first colonists that were Protestants were Reformed. They included among them the first foreign missionaries of Protestantism. It is therefore proper before Ave pass on to examine the origin of the German Reformed in the United States, that we consider briefly the earlier Reformed on this continent. A.-THE REFORMED OF SOUTH AMERICA. CHAPTER I.— SECTION I. THE FRENCH REFORMED IN BRAZIL. The first Protestant settlement in America was the French Reformed colony in Brazil. And as they began the work among the native Indians there, they also have the honor of being the first Protestant missionaries. Protestantism was hardly born before it began to save the heathen. These missionaries were sent out one year before the Lutherans sent their first foreign missionaries to Lapland. The names of these first missionaries deserve to be embalmed in tame. They were Peter Richer and William Chartier. In 1555 a French colony was sent to Brazil. It was led by Villegagnon, who by his ability and bravery had become vice admiral of Brittany. He was the one who in 1548 had brouglit Mary Queen of Scots safely to France in spite of the watchfulness of the English. He espoused the Protestant cause and dreamed of founding a great French colony in the new world. Admiral Coligny too approved of the expedition. For he feared a perse- cution (such as came so terribly on himself and the 4 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IX U. S. Huguenot Church afterward), and he looked westward toward America as an asylum for his persecuted brethren. The expedition sailed July 12, 1555, from Havre and landed in the harbor of Rio Janeiro, November 10, 1555. Tlicy took possession of the country in the name of France, calling it Antarctic France. On an island in the harbor, w-hich still bears his name, Villegagnon erected a fort. On February 4, 1556, he sent one of his ships back to Europe, and through it sent word, asking for some Reformed ministers for the colony. The Reformed family of Churches has always been ready to respond to a call to missionary work, and the church of Calvin, at Geneva, at once appointed two ministers. They set ^ail together with about a dozen artisans from Geneva, led by DuPont, in a ship which had about 200 colonists. After being almost shipwrecked they arrived at Rio Janeiro Marcli 9. When they saw land, they rejoiced with new joy at being the first to tell the story of Christ to the heathen. Villegag- non welcomed them by a salute from the fort. A thanksgiving service was held, at which they sang the fifth Psalm, after which Richer preached on the 26th Psalm. Villegagnon ordered them to hold a daily service. On March 21 they celebrated the Lord's Supper, the first time a Protestant communion was ever celebrated in America — a forerunner of many rich spiritual feasts to the thousands of Protestants who al'ter them settled in THE FRENCH REFORMED IX BRAZIL. 5 this western world. It was not long before the minis- ters, touehed by the condition of the natives, endeavored through an interpreter to teach them the first principles of the Protestant religion. The natives were greatly aston- ished at what they heard, and some of them promised to become worshipers of the true God. But the colony had too short a history to produce great or permanent results. Unfortunately Villegagnon began gradually to return to the Romish faith. Among the emiorants was a student of the Sorbonne in Paris who had been secretly promised the episcopal jurisdiction over the colony if it were won back to Rome. To accomplish this he introduced controversies on some doctrinal points with the Reformed ministers — as is it lawful to mix water with wine in the Lord's Supper? may the sacra- mental bread be made of Indian corn ? etc. He also objected to certain rites of the Reformed, claiming that unleavened bread ought to be used at the communion, and baptism should be with salt and oil as well as water. The ministers stoutly withstood him. But when Richer preached against these doctrines, Villegagnon became angry and forbade him to preach on such subjects and to administer the Lord's Supper. The questions in dispute were referred to the French Reformed church, and Charticr was sent back to Europe for a decision on these points. While Villegagnon was in this uncertain state of mind, a ship from France arrived, which brought him a letter b THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. from the Cardinal of Lorraine restoring him to the bosom of the Catholic Church again. He now openly attacked Calvin, calling him ' a frightful heretic' He began per- secuting the Reformed by ordering Richer to subscribe to the Romish doctrines of the mass and purgatory. This he refused to do. He therefore drove Richer and the Genevan contingent from the fort. But whither should they go ? There was not a Protestant colony in all the new world save tlieir own. They went across the bay to the mainland at the risk of being massacred by the Indians. Fortunately the natives received them kindly and brought food to them, while they in return tried to teach them the way of life. As they could not exist there long, they asked permission of Yillegagnon to return to Europe. He finally allowed them to return on a French vessel that came into port, provided they would take in their vessel a sealed chest. In this, with the basest per- fidy, he had placed a paper, which was to be given to the judge of the French province where they might hap- pen to land. This paper preferred charges against them as heretics and directed the judge to seize them and burn them at the stake. Ignorant of this perfidy they set sail January 4, 1558, having been in Brazil ten months. They soon found that they had exchanged a wretched existence on land for a more wretched one on sea. The ship was slow and unsea- worthy. On the seventh day she sprang a leak. Fortuu- THE FRENCH REFORMED IN BRAZIL. 7 ately they were able to stop the leak, but the ship carpenter declared that the cargo was too large for such an old and worm-eaten ship. The captain, afraid that if he once landed, his crew might all leave him, refused to turn back, but olfered a boat to any who might want to return to America, then ten or twelve leagues distant. The captain was the more willing to do this as he had not sufficient provisions. Five of them accepted his proposi- tion and took the small boat to return to Brazil. They floated along for four days, using their clothes for sails, when a severe storm came up on the sixth day, which threw them ashore at the foot of a high mountain. They then proceeded to Riviere des Vases. At this place the natives treated them very kindly After staying with them for four days, they started back to Villegagnon and arrived there in four days. They begged him to receive them, in spite of their differences of faith. He did so, but becoming suspicious that they were spies sent back by DuPont, the leader of the Genevan contingent, he attacked them by ordering them to sign a Catholic confession of faith within twelve hours. Of course they refused to do this and ordered Bortel, the best educated among them, to draw up a confession in reply, which they signed. Villegagnon then arrested Bortel as a heretic, and when he bluntly refused to recant, he brutally struck him with a fist and ordered him to be hurled from a high rock on the island into the sea. Another, Vermeil, was led to the 8 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. same rock, and when he refused to recant, he too was thrown over into the sea. A third, Bourdon, was sick in bed ; but when he refused to go over to Rome, Villegagnon had him bound and carried in a boat to the rock of execution where he was cast into the sea. " This," says Kalkar, the great Lutheran authority on missions, " was the first blood shed as a witness for evangelical missions." The Reformed Church, as it had the honor of having sent the first missionaries to the heathen, had thus also the honor of having the first martyrs for missions. Meanwhile those who remained on the vessel, which these had left, seemed doomed to a living death. A hun- dred times a day it seemed as if the ship would be swal- lowed up by the waves. The crew were kept at the pumps night and day, and yet in spite of their exertions they were hardly able to keep the water down. One day as the carpenter was mending a part of the ship, a plank gave way. In a moment the sea rushed iu with the force of a torrent. The sailors came rushing on deck, crying, " We are lost." The carpenter, however, retained pres- ence of mind enough to thrust his coat into the hole. And by treading on it with all his might, he resisted the force of the water. He soon received hclj), which enabled him to keep the hole shut until he prepared a board with which to close it. On another day, when the powder was drying, some of it caught fire. The flames quickly ran from one end of the ship to the other, and set the sails THE FRENCH REFORMED IX BRAZIL, 9 and cordage on fire. Four men were burned (one of whom died) before it was put out. To all these horrors was added starvation. They had with them a number of parrots and monkeys, which they were taking home as curiosities. These were soon eaten. Then rats and mice were hunted and eaten. Even the sweepings of the store room were gathered and cooked into a sort of pottage ; and though it was black and bitter, they were glad to drink it. Those who had bucklers made of the skins of the tapiroussou (an animal of Brazil), cut that skin into strips and devoured it. Others would chew the covers of their trunks and the leather of their shoes, yes, even the horn of the ship's lanterns. They became so starved that they would have been glad to exchange their state with that of the king in Scripture, who is said to have eaten grass. Finally nothing was left for them to eat except Brazil wood, which is said to be the driest of all woods. Peter Richer, the Reformed minister, was so prostrated by hunger that he could not lift up his head, even in prayer. Indeed, owing to the intensity of the sufferings, it is remarkable that they did not kill one another for the eake of food. Finally, after a voyage of five months, the pilot said he saw land. This was very fortunate, for the captain said that he had determined that on the next day they would have to draw lots for the purpose of killing one of the ship's company for food. They landed finally on the 10 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. coast of Brittany, near I'Orient, at the mouth of the Bla- vet river, on May 26, 1558. The inhabitants, touched with the story of their sufferings, kindly gave them food and assistance. Many of the sailors, however, neglected the precaution necessary for starved men and ate so freely that they died. Others recovered, but for a long time were afflicted by various diseases, as blindness, deafness, swellings of the body, etc. And just here we can see the kind providence of God. The French Church had always believed in the safety of God's elect. The sealed box, which Villegagnon had given them, was given by them, all ignorant of its contents, to the judge of that district. Fortunately they had been cast on a jiortion of France where the judge happened to be favorable to the Protest- ants. Instead, therefore, of executing the treacherous orders of Villegagnon, he on the contrary treated them with great kindness and permitted them to return to their own homes. The colony in Brazil was soon after destroyed by the Portuguese. Yillcgagnon returned to France, where he tried to clear himself of his cruelty and perfidy, which had become known to the world. So ended the first attempt of the Reformed to settle in the new world. But though the existence of the colony was brief, its career was glori- ous, because of the movements it started in the Reformed Church. Its founders attempted to lay the basis of the greatest work of the Protestant Church — foreign missions. THE FRENCH REFORMED IN BRAZIL. 11 As Reformed they attempted to make the western world Protestant. All honor to Richer and Chartier, the pioneers of Protestant missions, and to the three martyrs for Protestant missions, Bortel, Vermeil and Bourdon. The bay of Rio Janeiro is said to be the most beautiful in the world, but it is not more beautiful than the crown of immortal glory belonging to these missionaries and martyrs. CHAPTER I.— SFXTIOX U. THE DUTCH REFORMED IN BRAZIL. The second attempt to foiuid the Reformed Church iu South America Avas made, not by the French, but by the Dutch. In 1G21 the Dutch West India Company was incorporated. Wliile its main objects were financial, yet it, like the Dutch East India Company, did not forget the religious condition of its colonies, but always sent pastors to minister to them. This company planted a colony iu Brazil at Pernambuco, on the coast — the most eastern point of Brazil and about 1200 miles from Rio Janeiro. The company appointed as its governor Count Jolin ^Maurice of Nassau -Siege n, * one of the most zealous Reformed princes of Europe. He was a prince of the Nassau line, made famous by William of Orange ; and though born a German, he entered the Dutch military service. He was sent out October 25, 1636, as the governor of Brazil, landing at Pernambuco, January 23, 1637. He tried to reintroduce the Reformed faith again into South America, and snatch it from the power of the Jesuits and the native heathenism that so abounded there. For it has been the rule of the Netherlands that wherever a Dutcli flag waved, there arose a Reformed congregation. The THE DUTCH REFORMED IN BRAZIL, 13 couut had takeu with him to Brazil, as his court preacher, Fraucis Plaute, who regularly held service for him. But he soon found that more ministers were needed for the colony ; so he sent back to Holland for them, and the next year (1637) eight Reformed ministers were sent thither. These ministers seemed to have the missionary spirit. As early as 1623 Professor Walaeus had started a mis- sionary school at Leyden, which aroused great missionary interest in the Dutch Church. The Reformed thus started the first school to train missionaries. It was an echo of the Synod of Dort where the subject of missions came up. These ministers seemed to have been full of the subject. A remarkable fact to be noticed about these men was that already in that infant age of missions they began to nse one of its first principles, namely, preaching in the native tongue. Although they were all Dutchmen, they learned other languages, so as to preach in them. They preached in French and Portuguese, as well as Dutch, so as to reach the foreigners. But they were not satisfied wath this. They were anxious to evangelize among the native Brazilians. In this they were ably supported by Count John Maurice and his chaplain Plante. They found that the Jesuits who had been there before them had been doing mission work under the . Portuguese ; but like all other Romisli missions, this w^ork was very superficial. Thev had not translated the Bible into the native tongue. (For therein lies the great difference between Catholic and 14 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IX U. S. Protestant missions. The first thing the Protestant mis- sionaries give to the natives is the Bible.) Neither had the Jesuits preached to Indians in their native tongue, for as the Catholics always do, they used only the Latin language in their services. The Reformed ministers found that all that the Jesuits had taught the natives ^vas to recite the Creed and the Lord's Prayer. The Dutch Reformed ministers aimed at higher results. They learned their language, so as to communicate with them and preach a living, not a formal, Christianity to them. Davilus was the first of the ministers to learn the native language. Doriflarius was eloquent in preaching in both the Portuguese and Brazilian languages, and translated the Heidelberg Catechism into the Tapuya dialect. It was the first Protestant catechism to be translated into any of the Indian languages.* These missionaries not only were missionaries to the heathen, but they also organized tlie first classes and synods in America. They were the first to bring the Presbyterial order of church government to this western world. Frederick Casseber preached in Recissa. In Olinda and the villages, Joachim Soller and J. Polhemius preached in French and Portuguese. In Tamarica Cor- nelius Poelius preached the gospel ; in Paraiba Samuel * It has been said that John Eliot's works in New Englanil, and also the Lutheran catechism, were the first translations into the Indian tongue, but that is not true. The Heidelberg was the first, translated by these Dutchmen into the Tapuya dialect. THE DUTCH REFORMED IN BRAZIL. 15 Rathelarius, an Englishman, preached. In the province of Cape St. Augustine John Stetinus labored with zeal, and in Serinhaen John Eduardi. In the province of Maragnana also God's word was preached by them. These various parts of the district formed classes which united into a synod. This occurred more than a half century before the Presbyterians organized their synod in Phila- delphia. The Dutch Reformed were the first to organize the local congregation in America at New York, and they were the first to organize synods thus in South America. There is still another peculiarity of this Dutch colony, namely, its fair dealing with the Indians. William Penn generally gets the credit of introducing this into America. But long before him Count John Maurice introduced it into Brazil. In every village he placed a Dutchman, who was to see to it that the riglits of the natives were pre- served, and that they were not cheated, but were paid for their goods. The natives therefore highly honored the Count, and one of their chiefs presented him with a costly dish, which he, after his return to Germany, presented to the Reformed church at Siegen, where, because of his long sojourn in America, he was called "the Brazilian." In 1645 he returned to Holland, bringing twenty-five tons of gold with him, and was received with high honors by the Dutch government. This colony was soon after destroyed by the Portuguese, and Brazil, instead of becoming Prot- estant, became the most Romish of countries. But, 16 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IX U. S. although driven out of Brazil, the Dutch later acquired a South American colony in Guiana, which was given to them by the English in exchange for New York.* Thus although the Reformed Church was crushed out of Brazil, yet in these colonics, French and Dutch, she could boast the first Protestant missionaries, the first missionary mar- tyrs, the first Indian catechism, the first Church organiza- tion into classes and synods, and the first attempt at fair dealing with the Indians. ■•■■ There are now about 7000 lle'"orQieil in Guiana. B.-THE REFORMED IN NORTH AMERICA. CHAPTER I.— SECTION III. THE FRENCH REFORMED SETTLEMENT IN FLORIDA. Admiral Coligny, having failed to plant a colony in Brazil, made another attempt to found one in Florida that should be an asylum for the Huguenots. To Florida, the laud of flowers. Ponce De Leon came in 1512, seeking the fountain of perpetual youth. To it also came the French colony in 1562, a few years after the destruction of the French colony in Brazil. The year 1562 was dark with ominous threatenings to the Reformed in France. The Huguenots looked westward to America as the land of wonder and promise. The leader of this colony was a staunch Reformed, John Ribaut, who was also a brave and experienced sol- dier. They sailed from Havre, February 18, 1562, iu two vessels. On a beautiful May day they entered the river of St. Johns, which they named the river of May. Up this river, famous to-day for its natural scenery, they sailed. They anchored near Fernandina and explored the country, finding it full of game. Ribaut built a fort about six miles from Beaufort, uhere he left a colony of 2 18 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. thirty persons. On June 11 lie set sail for France, leav- ing this the only Protestant colony in all North America from the North Pole to Mexico. Soon came the struggle for food. The Indians fortunately were very kind to them, bringing them supplies as long as their own lasted. But the French wearied of their solitude and longed for home. So they set about building a rude ship on which they sailed for home. Their food gave out. Some died of starvation. Finally an English bark hove in sight of them and carried them prisoners to Fnglaud. In the meantime Ribaut had returned to France to fit out another expedition. Darker days w^ere gathering for the Huguenots there. Plots at the court were growing against Coligny. Still he had influence enough to fit out a second exi)edition of three vessels under Rene de Lau- donniere. They arrived at St. Johns river, June 25, 1564. Tliey soon found that the former settlers had left, but they were very cordially welcomed by the Indians. All of the colonists were French Reformed,* but many of them were adventurers rather than of a reliy;ious turn of mind. They built a fort about five miles from the mouth of the St. Johns and thirty miles northwest of St. Augus- tine, which they named Fort Caroline, beginning their work after the Huguenot fashion Mith the singing of a Psalm. ♦Some of the Lutherans like Rev. Dr. Seiss speak of them as Lutherans, but there were no Lutherans in France at that time, as the whole French Church belonged to the Huguenot or French Reformed faith. FRENCH EEFORMED IN FLORIDA. 19 Unfortunately the second party did not treat the Indi- ans as peaceably as did the first colony, but became in- volved in a war with them. This was all the more unfor- tunate, for they would have to rely on the Indians for much of their food, especially as there was not a farmer among the colonists who knew how to till the ground. Dissatisfaction too arose among the colonists. The relig- ious Huguenots among them complained that no minis- ters had been sent with the party. Others complained of hard work and bad food. Laudonuiere as the leader had to bear the burden of these grievances. Finally there %vas an insurrection against him that imprisoned him, and some of the mutiucers went on a privateering expedition against the Spanish islands, December 8. This at first was quite successful, but ultimately proved most unfortu- nate for the colony, as it made known to the Spaniards that there was a strong French colony in America. After they had gone, Laudonniere was reinstated by his friends, and the colony was well reorganized, as the bad blood of the colony had been drawn oif. He now proceeded to finish the fort and build two new vessels to replace the two which the mutineers had taken away with them, when news came (March 25) that a vessel had appeared. It proved to be the mutineers returning. Laudonniere recaptured the vessel, and the leaders were shot. With May came the third anniversary of Ribaut's arrival, but now the colonists were ragged and starving. 20 THE GERMAX REFORMED CHURCH IX U. S. Laudonniere finally couceived the idea of capturing an Indian chief and holding him until the Indians had brought enough corn to keep the colonists from starva- tion. He succeeded in capturing Outina, the chief, and finally the Indians brought a good deal of corn. Lau- donniere at length released the chief, but all this only made the Indians enemies, for they so attacked them that they only secured two bags of corn. Famine now raged in the fort. The Indians had killed two of their carpenters, which would delay the buildiug of the ships. Finally came the climax. They were startled, August 3, 1565, to see three vessels appear at the mouth of their river. Who were they, friends or foes ? They proved to be English ships under Sir John Hawkins. As they were Protestants also and hated Spain as much as the French, they soon showed their friendship. And when Hawkins found that some of them wanted to return to France, he sold them one of his smaller vessels, receiving in place of money the cannons of the fort. This was very unwise, for it left the fort almost defenceless, except by two field pieces. After their departure the colonists prepared to sail, but before they were ready, seven vessels appeared, August 28. Were they friends or foes ? They were about firing on the strangers, when the latter called to them in French. And lo ! it was the sipiadron of Ilibaut, the founder of the colony, who had embarked with three hundred men from Dieppe and brought everything ueces- FRE>"CH REFOEMED IN FLORIDA. 21 sary to make the colony permanent and successful. Stores were landed from the newly arrived ships. Everything swarmed with busy life and hope again. " But lo ! how oftentimes misfortune doth search and pursue us, even then when we think to be at rest," said Laudonniere. All seemed hopeful now, but on the clear sky a cloud appeared. On the night of September 4, Ribaut's flagship saw a huge ship, grim with cannon, floating toward her, bearing the flag of Spain. For the Spaniards had heard of the colony, and had sent Don Pedro Menendez with eleven ships to crush it. Spain claimed all North Amer- ica by right of discovery, and would have no Frenchmen, still less Protestant heretics, on it. The Frenchmen on the ship, when they saw the Spaniards, cut their cables and fled to sea. Menendez in the morning gave over the chase and returned to the St. Johns. He found Ribaut had gathered his ships within the bar and was ready to meet him with his soldiers. So he sailed south- ward to St. Augustine, where they built a fort and founded what is now the city of St. Augustine. Ribaut having heard that the Spaniards had fortified St. Augustine, de- termined to attack it by sea. His ships were on the point of attacking St. Augustine when a terrible gale prevented. Meanwhile Menendez formed the plan of marching over laud and attacking Fort Caroline. His soldiers at first were unwilling to go overland, but he was determined, and five hundred started, led by two Indians. Through 22 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IX U. S. three days of driving rain they marched through the for- ests, Menendez urging them by saying, " This is God's war. It is a war with the Lutherans" (as the Catholics then called all Protestants). On the morning of Septem- ber 20 they burst on the fort. The French were utterly unprepared, not a sentinel being on the rampart. Those of the French who were able, escaped to the woods ; the others were brutally killed, until 142 were slain in and around the fort. The son of Ribaut in a small vessel fled to sea. He afterwards picked up Laudonuiere and 25 others and then put to sea for France. Menendez sent word to his king that he had taken fifty prisoners, women, infants and boys under fifteen years of age, saying he was " in great anxiety lest through them the venom of heresy should spread." He hung a number of his pris- oners on trees, placing over them the inscription : " I do this not as to Frenchmen, but as to Lutherans." Meanwhile a terrible fate had befallen Ribaut's expe- dition. The gale had shipwrecked his vessels on the coast below St. Augustine. His men, ignorant of the fate that had befallen Fort Caroline, struggled northward in two parties through the forests to reach the fort. Menen- dez, having returned to St. Augustine, soon saw the fires of one of the expeditions. He set out against them. "Are you Catholics or Lutherans ? " he asked. They said the latter. He told them that their fort had been taken and bade them surrender. As they had no hope but starva- FRENCH REFORMED IN FLORIDA. 23 tion, they surrendered. As they came to him in bands of ten, he had them killed, sparing only twelve, who said they were Catholics. He did this, saying to his king^ " that thereby in future this evil sect (Protestants) will leave us free to plant the (Catholic) gospel in these parts." He then waited to hear about the other party of Ribaut. On October 10 the Indians brought the news of a larger part}-, among whom was Ribaut. They at first pretended great bravery, but as they were starving, they were compelled to sue for terms of surrender. Ribaut came to him and plead for mercy on his men, as the kings of France and Spain were at peace at that time. Men- endez, however, compelled him to an unconditional sur- render. When the Huguenots were surrounded by the Spaniards, they called out to them : " Are you Catholics or Lutherans, and is there any one among you who will go to confession ?" Ribaut answered : " I and all here are of the Reformed faith." He then recited the Psalms. " Lord have mercy on me. We are of earth," he con- tinued, " and to earth we must return. Twenty years more or less can matter little." Then turning to Menen- dez he bade him do his will. Menendez then cruelly put all to death. Thus was the Huguenot colony in Florida blotted out, as it had been before in Brazil. When the news of Menendez's terrible cruelty reached France, a cry of horror went up from the Huguenots there. The king, however, 24 THE GERMAX REFORMED CHURCH IX U. S. being a Catholic, did not attempt to avenge their deaths — especially as he was then just beginning to feel the bitter- ness against them, that culminated later in the massacre of St. Bartholomew. It was left for a French nobleman, de Gourges, to wipe out the stain and avenge the slaugh- tered Huguenots. On August 22, 1567, he sailed from the mouth of the Charente. He never told his crew whither he meant to go until they were oif Cuba. When he told his sailors, their enthusiasm knew no bounds. Menendez, meanwhile, had strongly fortified himself at both St. xlugustine and Fort Caroline. When de Gourges came near the shore he found the Indians gathered to resist him as they thought his ships were Spanish, for the Indians had been greatly illtreated by the Spaniards. But as soon as they found they were the French they were very glad and agreed to aid the French, but asked three days for preparation. When they came in sight of the Spanish fort at Fort Caroline, de Gourges cried out to his soldiers : " There are the murderers who have butchered our countrymen." And now it was the Spaniards' turn to be taken by surprise there. They were totally unprepared and not a Spaniard escaped. On the very trees where Menendez had hung the Huguenots, de Gourges hung the Spaniards, placing over them the inscription : " Not as to Spaniards, but as to traitors and murderers." He did not attempt to capture St. Augustine, for he FRENCH REFORMED IX FLORIDA. 25 felt his mission was accomplished by the capture ot" Fort Caroline. He bade the Indians destroy the fort at the mouth of the St. Johns. Then embarking, he thus addressed his men : " My friends, let us give thanks to God for the success He has granted us. Not to our swords, but to God only, we owe our victory. I^et ns pray, too, that He may so dispose the hearts of men, that our perils and toils may find favor in the eyes of our king, and of all France, since all we have done was for the king's service and for the honor of our country." De Gourges left Florida May 3, 1568, reaching Rochelle by Whitsunday, where the Huguenots received him with great honor. But the king received him coldly ; and fearing disgrace, he finally retired to England, and then to Portugal, in whose service he was again asked to cross swords with the Spaniards, but died on the way to Tours in 1583. Menendez finally left Florida and the Spaniards abandoned it in disgust. Thus was the French colony destroyed and avenged. Not at Fort Caroline, but in the Carolinas, in the next centuiy, were the Huguenots to find a refuge, as they did after the Revocation of the Edict of Nantes. Then hundreds of them found a home, especially in South Car- olina, where a French Reformed church was founded very early at Charleston, which is still in existence. CHAPTER I.— SECTION IV. THE DUTCH REFORMED IN NEW AMSTERDAM. This colony had as its forerunner Heudrik Hudson, the discoverer of the Hudson river, who took possession of it in the name of the Dutch. It was settled by the Dutch West India Company. The first governor of the colony was Peter Minuit. He was born (1580) at Wesel, in northwestern Germany, one of the strongholds of the Re- formed Church. Born so early, he almost touches the reformers of our Church — for both Olevianus and Ursinus were living when he was born. He may, therefore, be called the connecting link between the authors of the Heidelberg Catechism and the Reformed in this western Avorld. Olevianus must have been a well known name to him in his boyhood, for he did not live so far away, and had, perhaps, passed through Wesel on his way to the Dutch Synod at Middleburg. Minuit was of good Huguenot stock, for Wesel had been a great asylum for the Reformed in the days of the Reformation. A large French Reformed church had been organized there, of which lie was an elder. He nuist have become a man of prominence there, for when he leaves Wesel he is appointed soon to such a j>r<>miiu'iit office as DUTCH REFORMED IN NEW AMSTERDAM. 27 governor general. He left Wesel, April 15, 1625 (before it was captured by the] Spaniards during ; [the Thirty Years' War), and, like many of his German cotemporaries, he entered the service of the Dutch government ; for the ruler of Holland was also a prince of the neighboring German province of Nassau. He was appointed, Decem- ber 19, 1625, by the Dutch West India Company governor general of their colony in New Amsterdam (New York), and sailed for New York, where he arrived May 4, 1626. As governor he ruled Avith signal success. Like Coimt John Maurice of Nassau Siegen, the South Ameri- can governor of the Dutch West Indies, he introduced fair dealing with the Indians. William Penn generally gets the credit for this, but Minuit preceded him. Honor to whom honor is due. Eighteen years before William Penn was born, Minuit made his treaty with the Indians, buying their land of them. He bought, in 1626, the island of Manhattan (22,000 acres, now New York city) for twenty-four dollars. Although the Spaniards waded through seas of blood to capture Mexico, Minuit, on the other hand, by the treaty of purchase, secured their lands by peace. Although the Dutch had already secured the Hudson by right of discovery, he determined to secure it by a higher right — that of purchase. It was, however, a shrewd act, for this fair policy with the Indians made- the Iroquois, or Five Nations, the firm friends of the Dutch. They ever remained the friends of the New York colony, 28 THK GKHMAX liEFOUMKD CHURCH IX V. 8. and atti'i-wards became the bulwark to })n)teet the e()h)nv against the Algonquin tribes of Canada, and their allies, the French. Having bought the island, he built on it a four-angled fort. He fostered agriculture and pasturage on the island. He also fostered friendshij) with the gov- ernor of Xew England, so that his colony might be strengthened against their common foe, the Spaniards. His administration was so successful that when he resigned and sailed for Holland in March, 1632, he took with him five hundred beaver skins, and the fur trade had risen dur- ing his administration to 14,300 gulden ($57,200). Dur- ing the six years of his administration he laid the founda- tion of the future metropolis of America, as w(>ll as the foundation of one of our greatest states. He was not only a wise statesman, but also a zealous member of the Reformed Church, and in this was quite in contrast with his successors. Van Twiller and Kieft, -who, like Gallio, ' cared for none of these things.' He founded not merely the city and the state, but the first Protestant congregation in this country. This congregation had ser- vices, it is said, as early as 1614, held by " sick consolers," and worshiped in the mill loft of the fort. The congrega- ti; the country) tliat tlie ten thousand hundred weiiiht of flour ordered for the soldiers (a larTave of Hesse Cassel, closed up some of the Catholic churches in retaliation until the Elec- tor of the Palatinate gave them back their churches.* This oppression occurred just a few years before the emi- gration. These persecutions were the cause of their desire for religious freedom. AVe are aware that there is extant a declaration of the Reformed consistory of Heidelberg ot June 27, 1701),t which declares there was no persecution But coni})ared with the other facts, it reads like a state paper rather than a free act — that is, one forced from them by the authority of their Catholic rider. The very fact that there was need for such action shows that there must have been cause for it somewhere. So much smoke must have had a fire to cause it somewhere. On July 9, 1709, the Reformed consistory sent some com- plaints to the Elector about religious oppressions. This dissatisfaction became so widespread among the Palatines by the end of July that the Ecclesiastical Council of the l^alatinate was led to contradict them so as to prevent more emigrations. Still all these acts but show there was dissatisfaction among the Palatines about their religious condition. The truth was that although seemingly the Reformed gained religious liberty in 1705, yet the facts show it was not so. There were constant sources of fric- tion between tiie Reformed and the court. We saw scores * See History of the Reformed Church of Germany, by Rev. James I. Good, D. D., pages 225-276. t See Lutheran Quarterly, April, 1897. 36 THE GEEMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. of Gravamina in the Palatine archives, and found a later book (1722) in the British Museum full of cases of com- plaints. The pamphlet entitled "An account of the present condition of the Palatines," published in I^ondon, 1699, declares that the suffering of the Palatinate was as bad as that of the Huguenots in France had been. Among other instances it cites the following : "A certain woman at Seckenheim, near I^adenburg, married to a Papist hus- band, having, however, brought up in the Protestant religion her daughter, she desired the minister of the place to admit her to the participation of the Lord's Sup- pet, being at the age required by the discipline of our churches, which the minister did without any manner of scruple. The proceeding was doubtless very innocent and justifiable by all divine and human laws, but it seemed so great a crime to the papists that the poor minister was taken up, committed a close prisoner, and fined 200 florins. Would any one think afterward that we enjoy a free liberty of conscience ? An inhabitant of Wiesloch, a papist by birth and profession, but a more honest man than the generality of his persuasion, married some time ago a Protestant wife ; and it was agreed and covenanted between them that the children should be christened and brought up in the Protestiint religion. His wife being brought to be of a male child, he, according to his ])romis(', got liim christened by the Protestant minister of the parish, which so incensed the popish clergy that they got an order to carry PALATINATE SETTLEMENT IN NEW YORK. 37 liim to Heidelberg, where he has been kept a close pris- oner and very severely used and forced to pay a line of 50 florins to come out." Such were some of the persecutions that made them long for religious freedom. These were the main causes why the Palatines left their fair land in such crowds to try the dangers of uncer- tain emigration and the terrible sea. They sought for free- dom of conscience, for civil liberty and for a competence in the land beyond the Atlantic. In addition to these general reasons there were several direct causes for the emigration. The general causes just mentioned brought the popular feeling into such a state of dissatisfaction that it needed but a match to set ofP the powder magazine. The following were the direct causes. 1. The Kocherthal Emigration and the Nat- uralization Act of England. — Rev. Joshua Kocher- thal, a Lutheran minister of the Palatinate, visited Eng- land in 1704, after the French invasion of the Palatinate in 1703, to inquire about the expediency of emigrating with his people to America. He returned and published a small pamphlet entitled " Full and Circumstantial Report Concerning the Renowned District of Carolina in English America." It was issued in 1706, and a second edition in 1709, and again in 1711. In January, 1708, he, together with 61 persons, applied to Davenant, the government agent of England at Frankford-on-t he-Main, for passes, money and recommendations to go to England . 38 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN V. 8. Davenant refused until their Elector had :i|>])n)V('d of tlieir departure. In spite of this rebuff Kochcrthnl and his party found their way throuiih Germany in Marrli, and he arrived in London in Ajiril with a hand of 41, of whom 26 were Reformed and 15 Lutherans. The (jueen eonsid- ered sending them away to one of the West India islands, as Jamaica or Antigua. (Nothing is mentioned ahont ( 'ar- olina.) They, however, objected, as tlie climate was too warm. 8o at her expense, after they had been naturalized May 10, they were sent, 54 in number, in company with Lord Lovelace, the new governor, to New York, arriving there January 1, 1709. But Lord Ijovelaee died by the end of May, 17()!), and Kocherthal then returned to England to j)ray the (pieen for her support. He came back to find London full of his countrymen, who had been drawn to that city by tiie very kind reception given to his party the year before. On March 28, 1709, the British government passed the Nat- uralization Act, which allowed the foreign Protestants to become citizens. Some writers as Cobb doubt whether the Naturalization Act had nuich to do with drawing the Pal- atines to England, because the time was too short for them to hear of it. They seem to think that it was the (|iieen's kindness to Kocherthal that was the bait ibr them. Uiit it is likely that this Act drew, if not the earlier emigrants, the later ones, and was looked upon as only another i)ledgc of England's kindly feeling. The distressed Palatines PALATINATE SETTLEMENT IN NEW YOllK. 39 liaviiii:; heard of all this kindness of England to the Ger- mans, reasoned that if England would treat his party sO well, she would do the same for them. 2. TuF. Golden Book. — It was eustoniary at that time for the German land companies, who had taken up 1 uids in I'ennsylvania, to seatter fiaming advertisements thi-ough (jlermany and iSwitzerland. The Palatines re- ported that a circular called the Golden Book (so called bjcause it had u picture of the (iueen of England in the front, and because the title page ^s'as in letters of gold), hid been scattered through (jermany. It aimed to encour- ai;e them to go to England, so as to be sent to Carolina, or some other of the English colonies. All efforts to find s ich a book have hitherto proved fruitless. Queen Anne n 'ver issued such a book, if, indeed, it ever existed. The bi)ok seems to l)e mythical as yet, but undoubtedly there was something at the basis of this report which caused such a fiu'ore among the Germans for England and America. .3. Tme Unusual Cold of the Previous Win- ter (17Uosed of iu three ways : 1. The first party was sent to Ireland, whither it was decided to scud 500 families. The parliament voted 44 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHtTRCH IN U. S. 24,000 pounds, (16,000 first, aud 8,000 later) ; aud 500 families, numbering 3,000, were sent over, beginning in August, aud in February, 1710, 800 more. They were settled in Munster. An English traveller writes of their descendants early in this century : " They have left off saner kraut and taken up potatoes, though still preserving their own language," And another, Kohl, in 1840, says they have not lost tlieir home character for probity and honor, and are much wealthier than their neighbors. 2. Another shipment was for the Carolinas. This expedition will be described in the following Section. It may, however, be noted in passing, that six hundred of them were to have gone to the Scilly islands, but were never sent. 3. The largest, and the one in which we are particularly interested in this section, was the emigration to New York. Awhile the English government was perplexed to know what to do with them, an incident occurred that affected the future of the Palatines. A delegation from New York arrived at London, headed by Mayor Peter Schuyler, of Albany. They brought with them four Mohawk chiefs, as specimens of the new colony, in order that they might be fully impressed with the greatness of England. These Indians, while sight-seeing in London, were taken to see the encamj)ment of the Palatines. ** They were so touched," says Weiser, " at the distress of the Palatines that one of them, unsolicited, presented the PALATINATE SETTLEMENT IN NEW YORK. 45 queen with a tract of his land in Schoharie, New York, for their benefit. Governor Hunter, the newly appointed governor of New York, proposed to the Board of Trade, November 30, 1709, that 3,000 be sent to New York to produce naval stores for the government — turpentine, rosin, tar and pitch. The Board of Trade brought the matter before the queen, also suggesting that if placed in that colony they would become a barrier against the French and Indians. There is a diiference of oijiuiou as to the date of the Pala- tines' departure. Weiser says on Christmas day. But Tribekko's farewell sermon was not preached until Jan- uary 20, and the queen's instructions to Hunter were not given till Jan. 26. Kapp places it in April. They sailed from Portsmouth, where their ships had laid some time. They landed in New York in the summer of 1710. The voyage was long and many became sick. Crowded together in the ships, almost to suffocation, with insufficient food, many of them (407) died. Hardly a family among them had not been touched by death, and there were nearly fifty widows and 100 orphans to be provided for. They landed, as Professor Jacobs says, "a crushed, sick and dispirited band of exiles." They were in such a sickly con- dition that the authorities placed them outside the city on Nutten (now Governor's) island. In the autumn of 1710, they were removed up the Hudson river and settled on both sides of the river at East Camp (now Germantown) and West Camp, south of Catskill. 46 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. They were soon put to Avork preparing; the trees for extracting of tar, ete. They Avere not verA' well satisfied with their lot. Still when the Avar broke out Avitli the French in Canada, 300 of them (about half of the Ncav York contingent of troops, it is said,) volunteered. But the efforts to extract tar from the forests of NeAV York, thus to proA'ide naA'al stores for England, AA'ere not a suc- cess. Hunter tried by force to make them do it. But the trouble Avas the trees Avould not yield it. The tar bearing trees in America do not groAA' north of Virginia, and from that district they extend soutliAvard to the gulf, and are knoAvn as the Georgia pine. Up to the summer of 1712, instead of the expected 50,000 barrels, only three score barrels Avere made from 1 00,000 trees. There Avas another cause for the foilure of this effort to make tar. The Whig party, Avhich, as avc have seen, supported the Palatines, gave place in England to the Tories, Avho opposed any more aid to the Palatines. The Board of Trade of Jjon- don took up their cause, but with a languid interest. Still their slight interest in it led to a correspondence between Governor Plunter and themselves that is very Aaluabk' noAV for its historical references. But as the Tory ])arty, Avhich Avas noAV in i)ower, would not aid him, (Joveruor Hunter Avas compelled to give uj) the making of tai- by the Palatines, as he had involved himself in debt liy tin- under- taking. The Tories repealed the Foreign Naturalization Act in 1712. PALATINATE SETTLEMENT IN NEW YORK. 47 The Palatiues liaviii(^ made one emigration, \^'ere now ready for another. They had become dissatisfied with what they considered the oppressions of Governor Hnnter. The vision of Schoharie was ever on their minds as their Mecca and Eldorado. The governor fonnd himself so im- poverished by 1712 that he was forced to inform them on October 31 that they mnst depend on their own resources for support. This news spread consternation among them, as winter was near at hand and starvation threatened them. But with the fertility of resource common to a German they set to work. They remembered the gift of the Indian chieftain in London. They sent a dejjutation of seven of their leading men to spy out the laud. An Indian piloted them to it from Albany. The Indians readily gave them the land, that had been promised to them in London, for $300. They went to Schoharie in two bands. Before the winter set in, the first went to it, consisting of fifty families. These fell to work and in t^vo weeks cleared a way through the woods fifteen miles long at the end of the journey. They had hardly arrived at their new home when an order from the governor came declaring them rebels, and order- ing their return. But it was too late to return, as winter had set in, and besides return meant starvation. During that winter they almost starved, and would have done so if the Indians had not helped them. In March, 1713, the second band of 100 families started from the Hudson. They traveled two weeks through snow three feet deep, 48 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN IT. S. suffering much from cold and hunger, the distance being ninety miles. They fondly compared themselves to the Israelites leaving Egypt, and called Governor Hunter their Pharaoh. They, however, had not been there long before their title to their lands was questioned by unscrupulous men, who claimed it had l)een given them by the govern- ment. When the government tried to gain the territory by force they resisted. The sheriff came against them, when the women took the matter into their own hands, led by Magdalena Zeh, and they rode him on a rail for seven miles or more, and finally left him with two ribs broken and worse indignities, to find his way home. He never returned after that. Their controversy with the govern- ment hung fire for several years. A conference with Gov- ernor Hunter in 1717 ended fruitlessly. So they determined to appeal to the English crown for support of their rights. They therefore sent a deputation to London in 1718, consisting of the elder Weiser, Scliefl' and Walrath. They set out secretly, as AVeiser had l)een ordered by the governor to be lumg for insubordination on account of the land titles. They did not sail from New York, but went by way of Philadelphia, where they set sail. ]5ut their vessel was taken by pirates and they were robbed, l^rought back to Boston, they again set out and arrived at London penniless. They were there thrown into the debtors' prison. The result of their privations was that Walrath died in London. Scheff quarreled with PALATINATE SETTLEMENT IN NEW YOEK. 49 Weiser and returned to America in 1721, where he died six mouths after in New York city. Even in prison they, however, foinid a way of f2:etting the ear of the king. Their petition was referred to the London Board of Trade. Remittances of money finally came to them from home, and Weiser was released from prison. He kept up the fight for their rights, remaining in London for five years, and in 1725 he returned to New York, having gained nothing. INIeanwhile the New York government had not been idle in pressing its claims. It had some of the lead- ers of the Palatines arrested, among them Conrad Weiser, the }'ouuger, who after\\'ards became the famous Indian interpreter. These were taken to Albany and released only after they had acknowledged the rights of their enemies to the lands. The Palatines having made two emigrations, were now ready for a third. Dissatisfied with their lot and their treatment, they Avere ready to seek a home elsewhere. Some of them went over into the Mohawk valley and settled. The others with whom we are most interested came to Tulpehocken, Pennsylvania. It came about in this way. In 1722 Sir William Keith, the governor of Pennsylvania, visited Albany in regard to a treaty with the Indians. He there learned of the distressed condition of the Palatines, and offered them an asylum in Pennsyl- vania. Many of them lost little time in accepting it. The first company started in the spring of 1723, not more than 4 50 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. eight months after Keith's invitation. They were k'd hy Hartmau Vinedecker, and consisted of 33 famihes. They ascended the Schoharie a few miles, then led by an Indian guide they went OA^er the mountains to the head-waters of the north branch of the Susquehanna. There they con- structed rafts or canoes for the women, the children and the furniture, while some of the men drove the cattle down the stream along the shore. " It was a band of exiles : a raft as it were from a shipwrecked Nation scattered along the coast, now floating together, Bound by the bonds of a commoia belief and a common misfortune." They traveled down the Susquehanna luitil they came to the mouth of the Swatara creek, up which they trav- eled until they came to the district of Tul]>ehocken, near Lebanon, which they named Heidelberg. They then wrote back to their friends, in New York, of the success of their journey. In 1728 another party started, led by young Conrad Weiser, who afterwards became a leader among the (lermans, and died at Womelsdorf, 1 7()(). Such was the romantic story of the Palatine emigration to New York. It does not concern us in Pennsylvania (hi-eetly,as most of the (irei-iii;ins wlio settled in New Yori< went into the Dutch Reformed Church. But indirectly it had great influence. For the sufferings of these Palatines in New- York, w^iien they became known among (heir friends in PALATINATE SETTLEMENT IN NEW YORK. 51 Germany, so turned their hearts against New York, that they for many years avoided that port. While Pennsyl- vania, by its warm reception, became the haven sought by thousands of Germans within the last century. Many of the Palatines in New York were later served by some of the early ministers of Pennsylvania, as by Weiss, and after him by Rubel and others, whom we will meet in connection with the coetus. CHAPTER I.— SECTION VI. THE SWISS EMIGRATION TO CAROLINA. Although this emigration took some of the Palatines from London, yet this colony was of Swiss origin and under Swiss management. The furore for emigration to America I also seized the SavIss. This was not due to any persecu- ! tion in Switzerland as in the Palatinate (for it was the land of freedom), but to the overcrowding of the country with refugees from other countries, who since the Peformation had found an asylum there. This emigration fever seized the Swiss especially at two periods, about 1709 and later about 1730. The first was the colony of Graifenried of Berne. The second Avas th(> colony of Pury of Neuchatel. Of the first only we will speak here, the latter we will con- sider later when we come to the liic of Goctschi. The canton of Berne seems to have been at first favor- able to colonization. It sent out Francis Louis Michel to America in 1701. He made twojounicvs across the ocean. On the first lie left, October 8, 1701, for Basle, arriving at Potterdam, October 30. He left London, December 15. He returned to Berne from America, December 1, 1702, but left again, February 14, 1703, for America. His published yeports and letters stirred up a great interest about the THE SWI8S EMIGRATION TO CAROLINA. 53 CaroHnas. Another Swiss, John Rudolph Ochs, who wont to America in 1705, returned to P^nirUind and settled in Ijondon. He there became a Ciuaker and published in 1 71 1 "A Guide to America" at Berne. Quite a mnnber of pamphlets beg'un to l)e ])ublished in Switzerland about America, es])ecially about the CaroHnas. These prepared the way for this emigration. But it was Graffenried who in connection with Michel (who was called Mitchell in Enghmd) led the colony. Christopher (Ttraft'enried was born in November, 1(361. A year and a, half after his birth his mother died, and although his father soon married again, yet as a boy he showed his headstrong, roving disposition. As a young- man he traveled througli Germany to Holland, and then to England, and finally to Versailles and Paris, making friends everywhere and developing his intense desire for travel. He returned to Switzerland and married, A})ril 25, 1084. When ]Mich(>l returned Graffenreid listened to his stories of America witli great joy. Finally he could hold himself back no longer, and in 1709 he started for England with the idea of founding a colonv in Virginia. He came to London just in the nick of time. The city was overflooded with Palatines, whom the British were anxious to get rid of. So an English society was founded to support him, which stood under tiie patronage of the queen, who gave 40( H ) ])()iiiids. He also labored among his friends at Bern, and together with Michel they founded 54 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN V. S. a society there^ named George Ritter & Co., with a capital of 7200 pounds. He and Michel bought at London of the Lords Proprietors 10,000 acres of land between the Xeusc and Cape Fear rivers, paying 20 shillings sterling for each 100 acres, and a yearly rental of six jk'iicc per 100 acres. The surveyor general was also fo lay out 100,000 acres to be taken up afterward. Under the feudal consti- tution of Locke he was made Landgrave of Carolina, July 28, and thus became one of the English nobility, which greatly suited his ambitious fancy. His society then pro- posed to take a number of these Palatines to Carolina. He agreed with the queen's commissioner, October 10, to transport 92 families (600 persons), to give to each family 250 acres for five years free of rent and after that a rental of two pence an acre. They were to be furnished with sufficient tools so as to be able to build dwellings and till the soil. Within four months after their arrival they were each to be given 2 cows, 2 hogs, 2 ewe sheep, 2 lambs, 2 sows. These were to be repaid by them in seven years. The royal commissioners allowed Graifenried and Michel five pounds sterling a head for transporting them, and gave to each colonist one pound in clothes and money. Together with a small colony of Swiss, who had arrived at London, they sailed, 650 in all, January, 1710. Most of them were strong young men; but the storms, the i)oor food and the close quarters caused nuich suffering, and many of them died on the way. A French shij) captured The SWISS emigration to Carolina. 55 the best of the vessels even at the mouth of the James river. They then went from Virginia to Carolina by laud on account of the dangers of the sea. Instead of the land which had been assigned them, Lawson, the surveyor gen- eral, gave to them the cape between the rivers Neuse and Trent, a hot unhealthy region, which was still occupied by the Indians. Soon they came into the greatest want, and had to give up clothes and tools so as to get food to pre- serve their lives. GrafFenried did not go out with his colony. He deter- mined to wait for a second expedition, especially as Hitter had opened an office in Switzerland and was sending some Swiss. It left Berne, March 18, 1710, about 120 persons in number, not counting the Anabaptists, of whon the can- ton was very anxious to be rid, but who were retained by their brethren in Holland. They came by Rotterdam to England. At Newcastle Graffi?nriedjoined the expedition. They weighed anchor on July 6, 1710, but waited on the high sea for a fleet which was to accompany them and pro- tect them against enemies. They sailed together till the northern end of Scotland, when seven of them sailed for America, going with a good wind between the Orkney and Shetland islands. The voyage took eight weeks. On Sep- tember 10 they lirst saw land. They sailed down the coast of Jersey to Cape Henry in Virginia, and lauded at the mouth of the James river, where is now Hampton. A long journey of 180 hours was still necessary to reach their 56 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. colony. Unforseen difficulties came in their way. The governor of North Carolina having died, there was strife between the parties. The Lords Proprietors had elected Hyde governor. But the Dissenters tried to put Carp in his place during his absence. The hitter wanted Graffen- ried to aid them, but he refused and recognized Hyde. In the meanwhile word came to him of the great need of tlie Palatines in his colony. He gathered, as quickly as he could, means of subsistence for them and hastened to them. He found them in a very sad coiulition, most of them being sick, quite a contrast to his ])arty of Bernese, who were all well. As Colonel Carp would not recognize Graf- fenried's patents to his land, he came into the greatest dan- ger. He hardly knew what to do. Money he had not enough. Yet he did not dare leave the colony or he would lose his reputation as an honorable man. He labored with great energy to get food. Meal was* ordered from Pemi- sylvania and food was sent to them from A'^irginia. In it all he pushed forward the founding of the colony, which was called New Berne. Land was measured, divided among them and houses were built on it. Difficulties began with the Indians. LaAVsou urged Graffi'uried to drive them away, but he refused, wishing to live on friendly terms with them. One day a man from Berne cut down one of the two idols beside the Indian's altar, and he boasted then tliat he had destroyed the devil. But Graffisnried did not apj)rove of it, and the Indian com- THE SWISS EMIGEATTON TO OAEOLINA. 57 plained bitterly. This was the beginning of trouble. Graftenried now proceeded to buy this land, which he had already twice bought, from the Indians with poM'der and lead. Unfortunately this ])ut into their hands tlie Ncry instruments for the colony's desti'iiction. The (piarrcl between Carp and Hyde for the governorship of Nortli Carolina continued until Hyde was recognized as governor. All these things, however, were only ])re])aring for a worse catastrophe. In the fall of 1711 came the great massacre. Two of the Indian tribes, the Corees and Tuscarawas, had by this time become jealous of the intentions of the white men. Lawson, the surveyor general, together whh Graffenried, went up the Neuse river with two Indians. Two negroes rowed the boat and one of the Indians led (Tralfein'ied's horse through the woods. The Indian who led the horse, went off to Catechna to tell the news of their coming. His sudden ap])earanee brought out the whole village. Tavo of the Indians came armed to the shore of the river. Graf- fenried wanted to return, but Lawson caused a lanchng to be made. In a moment they were surrounded and taken captive. They were led through the woods to the Indian village. In the evening the Indians held a pow-wow to consider what was to be done with Graffenried and Lawson. The Indians decided to permit them to return, but the next day two strange Indians arrived and asked for a rehearing of the case. Lawson uufortunately got into con- 58 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN V. S. troversy with the chief of the Corees, when tliey were both attacked and bound. The Indians began their wild dance, and Gratfenried and LaAvson expected death, Graifenried succeeded in getting into communication with them througli an Indian who understood English. The Tuscarawas Indi- ans held an all-night meeting, and in the morning Graifen- ried was set free. Lawson was put to death most cruelly by having pieces of splinters driven into his flesh and set on tire. Graifenried saved his life by claiming to be king of the Palatines, and asking by what authority they would put a king to death, especially as he had committed no crime against them. He assured the Indians that he was uot English, and had nothing to do with the encroach- ments on their territory, but that the Palatines were a peaceable people. He Mas finally frcetl after six weeks' bondage, but on condition that the Palatines would uot take any more land, and also would remain neutral in any war l)etween the Indians and English, which they after- wards did, much to the disgust of the English. Meanwhile the Indians had gone on the war-path. They attacked New Berne on September 22, 1711. They entered the village under the guise of friendship, demand- ing provisions. Then pretending to be offended, they fell to Idlling. The carnage in that district lasted three days, the Indians destroying 130 settlers from lioauoke along the Pamlico Sound to the Neuse, of whom sixty and more were of the Swiss and Palatines around New Berne. THE SWISS EMIGRATION TO CAROLINA. 59 Thus the early Reformed had their martyrs in the New World, for all the Swiss aud many of the Palatines were Reformed. The governor of North Carolina called out the militia, 600 strong. They marched to the Indian village of Catechna, captured and destroyed it, killing and taking prisoners 900 men, women and children. Peace came tlieu with the Coree tribe, but the Tuscarawas emigrated north and joined the Five Nations in the Middle States, thus making them the Six Nations. Graifenried, set free by the Indians, with great diffi- culty made his way to New Berne through the woods. He found his colony virtually ruined, their houses having been destroyed ; aud many of the colonists had gone away. He did what he could and kept the remainder together for 22 weeks, in constant fear of attack. But his own colonists turned against him, and the governor suspected him because he would not take sides against the Indians. In his great need and danger, and without food, it occurred to him to ask aid of Governor Hyde. He went to him aud he never afterward returned to the colony. He then went to Virginia, where the governor, Spotswood, received him kindly. Finally his friend. Governor Hyde, died, and discouraged he left Virginia, Easter, 1713. He returned to Berne by way of London, where his former friend, the queen, had just died. So giving up hopes, he went back to Berne, where he arrived on December 2, 1713, but he found no welcome there. Durino- his absence he had lost 60 THE GERMAN KEFOEMED CHURCH IN U. S. his citizenship there, aud every one seemed to luive tnrned against him. On the death of his father in 1730, he inher- ited his property, and was made comfortabk' ao-ajn. He died in 1743. The impression generally made l)y American accounts of Gmifenried is that he was a rascal, who swindled the Palatines and Swiss out of their lands in South Carolina (for Pollock afterwards took the lauds from them, ( Jraffen- ried having mortgaged himself to J\)llock I'or ulpit in 1GS7. After that date there is no mention of the exist- ence of the congregation.* This congregation afterwards became Presbyterian. Indeed it was the forerunner of the Presbyterian denomination, which was founded by Rev. Francis Mackemie in that peninsula in 1699, as well as of the German Reformed Coetus of Pennsylvania. From these facts we see that when William Penn lauded in Pennsylvania in 1682, there was a Reformed congregation at NcAV Castle. Although this isolated Reformed congre- gation never was organically connected with the German Reformed churclies of Pennsylvania, which were founded later, yet it reveals the tendency of the Dutch Reformed to settle Avestward from New York. This conquest of Delaware led the Dutch to settle New Jersey. Some passed over into Pennsylvania, and tluis founded their congregation in Rucks county, Pa., whose pastoi" organ- ized what may be called the first (ierman Reformed con- gregation in Pennsylvania. For in 1710 Rev. Paul Van Vlec(( became tlie pastor of this congregation at Neshaminy, Pa. He had been a schoolmaster at Kinderhook, 1702. Colonel Nicolson ordered the Dutch ministers of New York, Du Bois and * for these data we refer to the excellent Manual of the Reformed Church in America, by Rev. E. T. Corwin, D. 1)., third edition, THE DUTCH PREPARATION. 65 Antonides, to ordain him as a chaplain to the Dutch troops who were ordered to CVinada. They plead to be relieved of doing this, as the Church of Holland had not given them that authority, and so Rev. Bernard Freeman (who had become the tool of the government, and was trying to introduce episcopacy into the Dutch churches) ordained him contrary to the wish of the Classis of Amsterdam, which expressed great grief at its irregularity. Van Vlecq was pastor of the Dutch congregations at Samine (Neshaminy), Bensalem and Germantown. He organized them. May 20, 1710.* Soon after Van Vlecq became pastor of this Dutch congregation in Buks county, as the Dutch called it then, he began preaching also to the Germans, who were then beginning to increase rapidly in Pennsylvania. On May 29, 1710, he visited Skippack and baptized 16 children, and on June 4, 1710, he visited White Marsh and organ- ized what may be called the first German Reformed con- gregation in Pennsylvania, although there evidently were a number of Dutch Reformed in it. On that date he ordained Hans Hendrick Meels and Evert Ten Heuzen as elders, and Isaac Dilbeck and William Dewees as dea- cons. On December 25, six months later, he ordained Evert Ten Heuzen and Isaac Dilbeck as elders, and Wil- * Bensalem was reorganized as a Presbyterian congregation in 1719, but the Neshaminy church still belongs to the Dutch Reformed, and now contains two of their congregations — North and South Hampton. • 5 66 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. liam Dewees and Jan Aweigt as deacons. In 1711 the congregation consisted of 15 persons. Van Vlecq seems to have remained in that region until 1712 or 1713, and in 1715 to have left America. After his departure tlie congregation at Neshaminy was sup])lied at intervals by Frelinghuysen, the Dutch Reformed min- ister on the Raritan. The organization made by the Dutch at White ISIarsh soon went to pieces, and the congregation was reorganized by Boehm in 1725, as we shall see. But the new consistory had in it one name that linked it to the early Dutch consistory, namely that of William Dewees. Dewees deserves special mention. He was one of the most prominent men in that district. He was the founder of the second paper mill in the colonies, built in 1710, on the west side of the Wissaliickou Creek, He was a most godly man, the pillar of the little congregation at White Marsh. As it was too weak to build a church for itself, it was accustomed to hold its worship in his house. So this congregation, like the early apostolic cluu'ches and like so many of the other early Reformed congregations, was " the church of the house." After his death the con- gregation went to pieces, and its members were incorjx)- rated into the neighboring congregations of (iermantown and Witpen. But the congregation was again revived in this century, and is now located at Fort Wasliington, Pa. Thus the Dutcli organization was the nucleus for the beginning of the German organization later. And thus THE DUTCH PREPARATION. 67 the Dutch in New York, through their colonies in Dela- ware and Pennsylvania, were the direct forerunners of the German Reformed Church in Pennsylvania. CHAPTER II.— SECTION II. REV. SAMUEL GULDIN (OR GULDI). If Peter Miuuit was the secular forerunner of our Church in this country, Rev. Samuel Guldin was the spir- itual forerunner. Not that Minuit was not spiritual ; for he was a religious man, but he represented the laity and the political element of our Church in American his- tory. He stands out for what the laity here have done for the Church, and his life was a prophecy of what our Reformed faith has done for America, for it was political Calvinism that founded the freedom of these United States. Like Minuit, Guldin was a forerunner only. His work was not political, but distinctively religious. He represents the Evangelism that afterward made our Church spread so widely. It is true, he had no hand in the organization of our Church, for he never belonged to the coctus (our first synod in Pennsylvania). Still his work should not be minimized on that account. His earnest preaching prepared the way for organization. He has the honor of being the first German Reformed minis- ter in Pennsylvania, as far as we know, and he did a very valuable work in preaching to the Germans (who were as sheep without shepherds), in baptizing their children and REV. SAMUEL GULDIN. 69 administering the Lord's Supper to them. Their religions opportunities were so tew that the coming of a Reformed minister among any of their communities was a spiritual uplift to them. He was born at Berne, Switzerland. His ancestors were, however, from St. Gall, his grandfather becoming a citizen of Berne, November 28, 1633, on the payment of 100 crowns. His father's name was Hans Joachim Guldi, which was the original form of the name, and his mother's was Anna Maria Koch. He was baptized April 8, 1664. His sister, Anna Maria, was baptized March 11), 1662, and Anna Magdalena, January 18, 1667. He was educated at Berne, entering the university there in 1675), and became a Swiss Pietist. The story of his conversion to God is quite interesting. In his Apology he says : " There were four of us, Samuel Guldin, Jacob Dachs (not Kcenig),* Samuel Shumaker and Christopher Lutz, who in 1689 determined to make a trip from Berne to Geneva. We resolved to make it a distinctively Christian journey, to avoid the quarrels (which are common among students), and to gather heavenly treasure. While at Geneva Lutz became sick. During his sickness he was not only brought to a profound knowl- edge of his spiritual condition, but we all, who before could not agree, became so united in spirit that we have always afterward remained faithful to each other. This * " Bilder aus der Geschichte der Protestantischen Kirche," by Trechsel, page 18. 70 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. happened at Geneva, in the seat of Calvin. Then we journeyed together to Lausanne, and ever after met daily in the morning and evening to worship God." After their return tiiree of them went to Holland, Lutz remaining behind on account of indisposition. On this trip Shumaker came into the severest temptation, suppos- ing that he had cooimitted the sin against the Holy Ghost, and continued in this state of miud until after thev traveled homeward again. On Guldiu's return to Berne, August, 1692, he became pastor at Stettlen, a league east from Berne, but still he was not satisfied with his religious state. Full conversion, the blessed forgiveness of sin, the knowledge of Christ's finished work — these he did not yet understand. On Christmas, 1692, his companion, Shumak- er, had been converted from darkness to light, and wrote about it to Guldin. This stirred him up the more. He became so dissatisfied with himself and his religious exper- ience, that he determined to give up the ministry. On the day that he was about doing this he experienced the change tor which he had been praying. Like the Apostle John he could tell the exact hour when first he found the Lord. He thus describes it : "On the fourth of Auirust. 1693, between nine and ten o'clock in the morning, the light of faith arose and was born within me. In that hour all my difficulties and scruples passed away, so that I was never afterwards affected by them. And I ])egan to preach with new power, so that all my congregation saw that a change had taken place in my soul." REV. SAMUEL GULDIJf. 71 His miuistry uow became remarkably successful, for his preachiug was with unction and power. He no longer preached dry dogmas in a cold and lifeless manner, as was only too common from the pulpits of Berne in those days of dead orthodoxy, but he preached Bible truths, illumin- ated with his own personal experience. Great crowds came to hear him, even from other parishes. He became too great a preacher for so small a country congregation. So providence promoted him. He had been there a little over a year, when on December 21, 1696, he was elected to one of the highest positions in the canton, as assisstant minister at the cathedral in the city of Berne. This was considered a great victory by hispietistic friends. On the day of his election Lutz wrote a joyful letter, which con- tains those words (playing on his name) : " Golden tidings. This day our golden brother Guldin was elected assistant by the majority of the votes of the council. May He anoint the man whom He has ordained. How it will sound in the oars of our enemies. The leader of the sects is now a pastor in the city, and a member of the ministerium and council. Thus the stone which the builder rejected has become the headstone of the corner. Inform the brethren, so that they may praise God and help us fight for the kingdom of our Lord Jesus Christ." Unfortunately this letter foil into the hands of the authorities and was the beginning of later trouble. Opposition soon showed itself. The worldly element 72 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. in the Church has never been friendly to the earnest gos- pel of evangelism, because it makes them uncomfortable in their sins. This is especially true, when, as at Berne, the Church was united to the state, which meant the pre- dominance in the Church of the secular over the spiritual. The conservative ministers in the canton, too, began to take a position against Pietism. Dead orthodoxy objected to the new life that was coming into the Church. Gul- din's increasing popularity as a preacher alarmed those enemies. Unfortunately one of these young Pietists, Koenig, was extreme in his views, preaching prcmillenar- ianism, which was then considered heretical by the strictly orthodox Reformed. Koenig also several times sharply criticised the government. Personalities also entered into the controversy. Bachman, the dckan or head of the church of the canton, and the leading minister at the cathedral of the city of Berne (whose assistant Gul- din was), bitterly opposed the new movement. Some said it was because he was jealous of Guldin's popularity as a preacher. As a result of all this, Guldin, Koenig and Lutz were ordered to appear before the great conncil of the canton. They were condemned and ordered to sign the Association oath, which was a new oath of the canton directed against the doctrinal views of the school of Saiininr in France, and also against the practices of pietism. The ministers and schoolmasters of the canton were all required to sign REV. SAMUEL GUT.DIN. 73 it, SO as to purge themselves of the taiut of heresy as over against the old orthodoxy of the Reformed. Guldin and his friends of course could not sign this oath. So they were condemned, June 9, 1699. Koenig was the one most severely punished, for he was banished from the canton, while Guldin was simply dismissed from liis po-ition at the cathedral. The time had not yet come, as it did later, for the Berne church to recognize Pietism as an integral part of the Reformed faith. This it began to do when Koenig was recalled (1730) as professor and afterwards began preach- ing. Lutz, his companion in Pietism, remained in the canton of Berne to splendidly vindicate the success of Pietism at his country parish of Arasoldingen by his open air services and evangelism. Dachs, one of Guldin's early companions in Pietism, was elected dekan or head of the Church of the canton in 1732, occupying the very position wliich Bachman, who HO bitterly opposed it, had held. And to-day the Berne church in its Evangelical Society, which is doing such excellent work, emphasizes Pietism as a part of the (Church's life, over against the rationalism prevalent in many paits of the canton. Guldin, however, did not wait for this final vindication of Pietism. There has hitherto been much uncertainty about Guldin's movements, both in Europe and in Penn- sylvania. Fortunately the facts are gradually coming to 74 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. light, and the discovery of his ocean diary clears up most of the difficulties. After he was dismissed at Berne he remained for a time at Rufenacht, two hours east of Berne, on the property of Mr. Von Muralt. He was then appointed pastor at Boltigen, a mountain parish south of the city of Berne, in 1701, but he left before he was there a year. His predecessor, Grimm, left and his succes- sor, Mauslin, came within the same year, and his brief pastorate was between them. Before his installation he was dismissed. In 1710 he came to America, having with him his wife and four children — Samuel, Maria Catharine, Christoffel and Emanuel Frederick. After his arrival in Pennsylvania he wrote a letter, December 1, 1710, from Rocksburg (Roxboro), near Philadelphia. This letter is so interesting, because it is the first letter of a Reformed minister in Pennsylvania, and also because its description of ocean travel reveals the peculiar dangers to which our forefathers were subject, that we give in full that part of it which describes his trip across the ocean : " r begin by saying that when it was the intention to sail on the ()th of June (O. S.) it was postponed in order to insure greater safety, since some preferred to cross the North Sea with the Russian fleet as convoy, hence it took place on the 20th (O. S.), or the 1st of July (N. S.), and on the 5th (July) following we sailed from London. At the very beginning of the journey, when we seemed to be out of all danger, being for a long time with a convoy, we experienced moi'e dangers and difficulties, and saw REV. SAMUEL GULDIN. 75 more enemies than afterwards, when we had left the fleet and went alone under the divine guidance ; for God wanted to show us that we should have more confidence in Him than trust in the help and protection of any creature. Within the first hour after our departure our ship ran into a little boat, by which a boy was drowned. Afterwards it ran into another ship which seemed to be broken in pieces, in fact both ships were damaged, the corners being knocked from our ship. In consequence of this our captain was arrested by a warship on the 8th (of July), and another cap- tain was given to us at Gravesend. The captain otherwise was a very fine and honest gentleman, but since we depended too much on him, and he, moreover, did not do everything rightly, because he tore his name and signa- ture unjustly from the agreement of a certain man, he was removed trom the ship, and hence we had to give up this false hope. " On the 12th, (of July) in the evening, we came at last, under adverse wind, to Harwich, from where we started early on the 13th, sailing after the Russian fleet, till on the same day, Sunday evening, we reached the fleet. On the 14th (of July) we sailed with the same. But on the 15th and 16th there was such a storm and con- trary wind, that a few ships lost their masts, and on the 17th we had to return to Harwich. During this time many, yea, even the most, took sick and could eat no more meat, since the meat *was not only very strongly salted, but also cooked in salt water. From that time till we came hither to the sweet water, I and my children never tasted any meat during the whole journey, other- wise we would probably not have escaped without some 76 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. sickness, or remained so healthy. On the 20th (of July) we left Harwich again, arriving at Newcastle on the morning of the 24th, with very good wind, where we found the ship of our countrymen who wanted to go to Carolina. During tiiis time there was again a violent storm, so that on the 21st during the night our ship and another one struck against each other, whereby both came into great danger. In tliis way human help and trust caused us again additional anxiety and danger. " The same day on which we arrived at Newcastle, we continued our journey, as the wind was very favor- able. Whereupon on the 25th, (of July) in the evening, we saw seven French warships with white flags, and as a result everybody was in great alarm during the whole night. There one could iiear how the thoughts of men become apparent, and where there was a confidence in God or in creatures. One coidd then hear all kinds of state- ments, they had known that seven warships had been cquip|>ed at Dunkirk, to wait for the Russian fleet, and if they would attack us, the whole fleet would be lost, since there were only four warships with us. Soon they said they regretted not to have had their goods insured (which could have been done at London at a certain sum, by which one is compensated for all his loss), and again they trusted to be able to fllee, since the ship could sail so well. But of trust in the Lord there was no evidence in many, yet nobody thought of resistance, especially since our siiip carried no gun or ammunition. Meanwhile I thought how easy it was not only by prayer to disperse the enemies, but also remembered wliat the Lord said to Israel through Moses : Ex. 14, 13, * Do not fear, stand firm and you REV. SAMUEL GIJLDIN. 77 will see the salvation of the Lord. As you have seen the Egyptians this day, you will henceforth see them no more.' And I also reminded some of this. " It happened here in the same way that on the morn- ing of the 26th of July, and during the following days, we saw the ships no more, a real pillar of the smoke from the Lord — I mean a thick and dense fog covering us for several days, separating us from the other ships so far that they neither saw us again nor we them. Moreover another wind arose, enabling us to change our course, hence they did not know what way we had taken. Thus we saw each other no more, although they ran ahead of us, wait- ing for our approach at another place, where we intended to separate from the fleet, as will soon appear. On the even- ing of the 25th of July, when the Russian fleet left us, we began with four other ships which were all bound for America, to sail in a westerly direction under the divine guidance and convoy, and early on the 29th of July the coast of Scotland came into view, where through a strong wind we would almost have been thrown on cliffs, but the day came to our help and on the 30th we had the same experience. Hence on our way from Harwich to this place we experienced nothing but storms and dangers, from which the Lord saved us. In such a fog as a pillar of smoke, which continued from the 26th to the 29th of July, we passed by day and night through many cliffs under favorable wind, leaving Scotland at our left and other islands at our right hand, so that on the morning of the 30th of July we saw the island Festland on our left and some others on our right as the last land. At the same time four of the above mentioned warships, which 78 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. had waited for us at these places, passed us, so that we neither heard uor saw anything of them, but simply received the reports from some sloops which they brought to us. We heard it with great pleasure, as we were a good distance ahead of them and nearly out of danger. Here then we were upon the open sea or the great ocean, where we had from the beginning a good wind, so that in the 2-3 weeks we had made half of the journey. " In the middle of our trip we had many calms, or contrary winds. But at the end we met the best wind, which brought us into the land and into the harbor. From the morning of the 30th of Jul}', when we came to this place, under a clear and pleasant sky, we met another, but good southwesterly wind, which blew so strongly that in one hour we made eight miles, and as a result we covered a good distance, losing the land from our sight. On the same evening we saw as on the North Sea, every time before the storm, the fishes called por- j)oises, which had taught us from experience that a storm would soon follow, as it also happened at this occasion, enabling us indeed to continue our fast sailing, yet com- pelling us to take in the high sails, and sail only with tiie lower ones. This wind continued yet the following two days, namely the 31st of July and the 1st of August (N. 8.) This day about noon we met a ship, whereupon the four ships which carried guns were immediately alarmed, but ours prepared itself to flee. But as it proved to be no hostile ship, soon everything became quiet again. On the same evening the wind changed and became southwest, through which we made five English miles an hour. The storm continued on the 2nd, 3rd and 4th of August. REV. SAMUEL GULDIN. 79 On the 3rd and 7th of Angiist we saw some fishes, which threw up the water very high. On the 5th we had almost a perfect cahn. The 6th of August in the evening a southwesterly wind started up, continuing on the 7th, 8th and 9th of August. During that time two ships left us, one of which went to Jamaica, the other to Guiana, in a southerly course. But the third, which was bound for Carolina, remained, so that we saw it for some days only a little, but afterwards no more. " On the 8th and 12th of August we saw again a large number of fishes, called porpoises, which were soon fol- lowed by a storm, which, however, did not last very long. On the 14th of August, while the wind was very good, we left the fourth and last ship, which went to New Eng- land, and hence we sailed alone with good hope and under divine guidance. The great storm which we had was on the 16th ot August, when we saw again early in the morn- ing a large number of the above mentioned storm-fishes. A strange wind was blowing at the time followed by a still stronger one in the afternoon, which increased con- tinually, so that we had to take down not only the upper sails, but also the lower ones. Finally in the evening of the 17th of August we could only keep half a sail hoisted. The rudder had to be tied securely, and during the whole night we had to leave the ship to the mercy of wind and waves. The waves were then like mountains, and the shij) was sometimes so high that we thought that we would be capsized, and again it went down so deep that it appeared as though we would be hurled into the depths. And yet with all that I and my children had no fear, but looked at the waves from the deck of the ship. On the 18th of 80 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. August came a strong east wind, that we eonld ao;ain cover a great distance of eight miles in one hour. This wind lasted the 19th and the 20th of August, followed by several days of calm, during which time we fisiied occa- sionally and caught also several dolphins, part of which we received. On the 2nd of September, we saw many fishes jumping into the air higher than a spear, and in the after- noon many very large fishes, swimming in imposing order and succession one after the other, upon which a good wind followed, so that we made every hour five miles. " On the 6th of September a splendid northwest wind began to blow, which continued during the three following days, on the 7th, 8th and 9th of September. On the 9th we saw several large fishes following each other like cows. On the 10th and 12th of September we met a very con- trary wind, which compelled us to change our course fre- quently. On the 12th of September began tlie last and best wind which we had during the journey, so that we made up to nine miles during an hour. This wind con- tinued for the 13th, 14th, 15th and 16th of Sei)tember. It enabled us not only on the evening of the 15th to touch the bottom with our sounding line, 15 fathoms deep, that is, 30 English or 45 German yards, but also on the morning of the 16th of September to see land for the first time, with a great and general joyousncss that the Ijord had happily thus far helped us. On the same day, the wind being favorable, we entered the Delaware so far that we were safe against all pirates, finding the water not more than 6 fathoms deep, and hence we were not able to continue, as the night had long lallen upon us. But while we thought we were beyond all danger, we had to REV. SAMUEL GULDIN. 81 experience another trial, that we might not place our con- fidence outside of God, but always learn to depend on Him, for at noon of the 17th of September we started from that place with the tide of the ocean. In seeking to get deeper water we soon ran upon a sand bank, which kept us busy during the whole afternoon to get our ship off from this place, but finally we fortunately succeeded, yet had to stay there during the night. On the 18th of September we obtained a pilot of the river to conduct us up the Delaware, and with him came the first fruits of the land — apples and peaches. " On the 20th of September we arrived at Newcastle, where some of us went on land for the first time, being received very well and kindly by some people, who gave us not only to eat and drink, but also gave us enough apples and peaches to take back to the ship, and as many as we could carry, all gratuitously. On the 21st of Septem- ber, as we coutinued, others came to us on the ship, who invited the captain and all the people to a dinner. He allowed some who had been ashore, to go v/ith him. Others brought large sacks of apples on the ship to divide them among the people. The same happened when some of us left the ship on the 22nd of September, going some miles on foot, till we saw Philadelphia for the first time from a distance and came into the city early on the 23rd of September, where the ship also arrived safely at noon. On the 24th my family and others disembarked and were received by good friends into their bouses for several days, free and without money, and were shown much love, and where we stayed to the 27th of Sejitember, when a Chris- tian friend, of my countrymen and relatives, procured a, 6 82 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. good house for us, eight miles from the city, among good friends, which he had given ns for the winter, or as long as we need it. " Thus the long and tedious journey has come to its desired end. It has taken us eleven weeks from Lonilon to Philadelphia, but seven weeks from one land to the other, whence we saw land for the last and the first time again. Three weeks we spent with the Russian fleet along the coasts of England and Scotland, and eiurht days on the Delaware. We would have finished the journey much sooner, if at the beginning Ave would not have waited so long for the other ships, and had not sailed with but half the sails. Thus the Lord has brought us hither without hinderance, in great happiness, not one of us hav- ing perished or having incurred any danger or damage " Now we live in the house of a dear friend, where the dear friend has lived for nine years, and which after the death of Kelpius, he has left our friend Matthai, but he to us. There we rest from our labor, the rest having become very sweet. Close by I have bought the first plantation I have seen, where we shall begin to live next Spring. Tiie place is called Rocksburg, or fortress of rocks, as the whole country lies upon many rocks. Thus our Ark has come to rest on a mountain as my seal-ring (motto ?) reads. Thus God has fulfilled all the signs of his divine will and pleasure towards me and uiy journey, which I laid before Him witli mouth and heart, and firmly trusted in Him, as I have gladly confessed tliis hoj)e befon; many in writing as well as in words, even in (>|)p()- sition to many objections, which for that reason were raised against me. But God and faith prevailed, an(l no KEV. SAMUEL GULDIN. 83 danger was too great, for everything is possible for him who believes." He closes the letter with thanks to God that his wife and all his children came over safely. On the other ships that had been with them many had died, among them the beloved Moritz, whose ship was afterward shipwrecked oif the coast of New York, although all on it were saved. He says he was glad that he had not arrived earlier, be- cause of the great heat of Pennsylvania in summer. (In a later letter of 1734 he gives an account of the great heat in summer, so that men fell dead in the streets from it.) He closes with a description of Pennsylvania, of its land, fruits, the cost of living and the civil and religious liberty. In 1718 he published his book, "A Defence of the unjustly suspected Pietists of Berne." This Defence (or Apology) consists of two parts. 1. The Relation, which contains thirty pages, and which is the indictment brought against the Pietists, together with the decision of the court against them. 2. The Apology, covering thirty-eight pages. The former is a legal document, prefaced by a glorification of the Berne church for its orthodoxy to the Reformed faith, especially since the reformation. Then it gives the charges against Guldin and his Pietistic companions. They were : 1. The circulation of heterodox, mystical, that is, pietistic books, as of Weigel, Poiret, Leade and Boehme. Guldin was charged with having received some of them 84 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. as a present, and with not having warned the people against such books. 2. Doctrinal errors as perfectionism — that a person can become perfectly sinless in this life; also that a Christian may rise to such an experience, where his prayers become all thanksgivings, so that he will not need to pray any more in words; also that an unworthy person should not come to the Lord's Supper; also that a person could not become a minister without an internal call. 3. Premillenarianism — that Christ would come visibly to earth before the milleuium. This it held to be con- trary to the Swiss confessions. 4. A new method of preaching different from what was taught in the schools and practised in the pulpit. He was charged with usino^ in his sermons the common dialect of the people, instead of the stiff style peculiar to the clergy. This it claimed detracted from the dignity of the pulpit. 5. Crowding the churches. They would draw people from other parishes, thus interfering with congregations and profaning the Sabbath by their journeys. One of them is mentioned as drawing large crowds from the country into the city to hear him. (Most ministers in this 19th century would be glad to be charged with this sin of crowded churches. It would be considered to their credit father than their hurt, as in Guldin's case.) G. Tremblings. Some of the congregations h^d copQ? REV. SAMUEL GULDIN. 85 under so much feeling that they trembled like the early Quakers in England. This, the opponents held, was contrary to the word of God and the custom of the Reformed Church. Guldin, it seems, laid himself open to condemnation, because he had expressed a doubt whether tremblino; was a work of God or of Satau. The o-overuraent held that he ought to have spoken boldly against this, or else kept silence altogether. 7. Prayer-meetings. It objected to these because they were held without the authorization of the state authori- ities, and especially as some Anabaptists, who were ostra- cised in Berne, were present on one occasion. 8. Correspondence with foreign Pietists. The Apology or Defence of Guldin is a personal defence of himself, and yet at the same time a plea for experimen- tal piety. He denies the charges and defeuds the Pietists. He begins by stating that the Church needed a new, a second reformation ; that as the first reformation was a reaction against the formalism of the Catholic Church, a new reformation was needed agaiust the formalism in the Protestant Church ; since dead orthodoxy had come, like a dry rot, into the Reformed Church of Berne. In reply- ing to the charges he says that he never received his Piet- ism from others, but from above. He then describes at length the journey which he with three others took to Geneva when he was a student, and also his later conver- sion while in the ministry. He declares that when he 86 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. went abroad he did not come into more contact with Pi(»t- ism than he had found in Berne. In regard to books he declares his right of freedom to read Leade's book, " Heavenly Clouds/' if he wished. But he confesses that when he read it he found much that to him was very dark. He declared the forbidding to read such books by the Berne clergy to be a great injustice. In regard to false doctrine he says there can be a per- fection in this life that is entirely scriptural, if it is properly understood. But he denies that the Pietists held that the fully sanctified did not need to pray. He holds that Pre- millenarianism is scriptural, but it was evident the millen- ium had not yet come. As regards church discipline or keeping the unworthy away from the Lord's table, that was clearly taught in the Heidelberg Catechism, and the authorities were, therefore, wrong in charging him with that as a sin. As to preaching in popular and not pulpit language, he says that was what Christ did. As to tremb- lings he replied that such tremblings were scriptural, like the struggles of the demoniacs in Christ's time. They were the signs of the efforts of the evil spirit to retain con- trol over our spirits. And as to prayer meetings, they were justified in Scripture by Christ and the apostles. As to correspondence with Laub and Locher, he rei)lie(l that it was not true since his student days. He says that Piet- ism was nothing but active faith and living Christianity. In a word, he declares their decision in dismissing him REV. SAMUEL GULDIN. 87 aud forbickliug liim to [)reach in tlie pulpits was unjust and false. He says that in Holland the arbitrary aetion of Berne against himself and the Pietists, as well as their persecution of the Anabaptists, had been severely criti- cised. He rejoiced that now he lived in the free air of Pennsylvania, and not under the aristocratic tyranny of Berne. He evidently acted wisely in removing to another land, from which he could rebuke his native land by a com- parison with its freedom, and thus shame Berne for its narrowness. It is hardly necessary in closing this review of Guldin's book to say that Berne has since learned the lesson he taught. Pietism is permitted. The aristocracy of Berne was overthrown in the early part of this century, aud now the Berne Church is only too liberal in allowing heresy, as many of its ministry aud even some of its theo- logical professors are rationalists. In America Guldin found a wide field for labor. There were many Germans and Swiss in Pennsylvania, and no Beformed ministers but himself. His evangelistic spirit found a wide opportunity here. He preached for the Reformed when opportunity offered, gathering them together in houses, barns or groves, for there were as yet no Reformed church buildings. After the first church was built at Germantown in 1719, he seems to have occasion- ally preached there. Ba'hm says in his report of 1739 to Holland that "at Germantown old Guldi occasionally preached." His home seems to have been at various 88 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. places — at Roxboro, Oley and Philadelphia. At Oley he seems to have led the quiet life of a retired farmer, though still preaching. He might have become the founder of the German Reformed Church in the United States if he had wished, but he does not seem to have been an organizer. It was left for two pious schoolmasters, Boehm and Tempelman, to do that work. They began very early by holding religious services, and one of them (Boehm) went farther than the other, and fully organized his churches, and so became the founder of the Reformed in Pennsylvania. Still Guldin's influence was doubtless a beneficent one, as it provided the colonists with some preaching, and prevented the earlier rising of the sects to power. He became later a tower of strength to the Re- formed, as we shall see, in the Moravian controversy. He died at Philadelphia, December 31, 1745, aged eighty- one years. CHAPTER II.— SECTION III. THE EARLY LIFE OF B(EHM. The Boehm ftimily had lived ut Dorlieini in Hesse. The father of Johu Pliilip Bfchm was Rev. Philip Lewis Bcehm, who was boru 1645, at Dorheim. In 1665 he attended the Reformed gymnasium, at Hanau, and matric- ulated at Marburg University, August 27, 1666. He became pastor at Hochstadt, near Hanau, 1680-1688, and was again there 1691-1700. From 1709-1713 he was pastor at Wachenbucheu. On January 18, 1717, he sent a petition for support to the consistory of Hanau, because he had become blind. This was granted a year and a half later, and five florins were given him yearly. He died in 1725. His son, John Philip Boehm, was born at Hochstadt, and baptized there, November 25, 1683. He had an older sister, named Margaret, born 1681, and twin brothers older than himself, named John Daniel and Clement Lewis. The place where he was educated for a schoolmaster has not yet been found, although his older brothers attended school at Hanau. From 1708-1715 he taught school at Worms. When Boehm taught at Worms the Reformed congre- 90 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. gation was comparatively new. The Reformed had not been permitted, by the Lutherans, to hold religious ser- vices in the town until 1699. Before that they had their church service at Neuhausen. But the terrible destruction of the city by the French, in 1689, had so depopulated it that the city government was inclined to grant concessions to other denominations so as to gain colonists. So on June 13, 1699, tlie city council and the Reformed drew up an agreement, by which the former gave the Reformed permission to have services in the city, while the latter, for this concession, promised they would never seek any pub- lic office, or demand any more rights than had been granted to them. The first Reformed service was held in the toMu in the open air, June 25, 1699, and the Lord's Supper was celebrated in the newly built churcli, January 1, 1700, with 250 communicants. The congregation, however, was not strong, numbering, in 1714, eiglity-three members. Its seal was a table, on which a candle was standing, which was being lighted by a torch. Boehm was the successor of Jacob de Malade, as school- master, and was elected to that position March 11, 1708. He soon found that he had bitter opponents in the congre- gatit)n. It seems that one of the elders, the most promi- nent man in the consistory, Christopher Schmidt, had had another candidate for Bcehm's position, named Matthias Diel, of Kesselstadt. The latter's defeat made liini Btt'hm's constant and implacable enemy. Ag-aiust him Boehm defended himself vigorously. HOCHSTAirr NEAR HANALI (tlie church in which P,.L-hm was haptized is ill the ceiUre of the picture). THE REFORMKU CHURCH AT WORMS (in wlmse schod li.elim taught) THE EAELY LIFE OF BCEHM. 91 The first open rupture occurred in 1710, in reference to the biiptisnial fees. The German custom was that the schoolmaster (who also acted as sexton), received the bap- tismal fees. (Bwhm's salary was 100 gulden the first year, and if satisfactory, 100 rixdollars later on, with the baptismal fees as perquisites.) In March, 1710, Schmidt proposed that the baptismal fees be put into the alms fund of the church. Boehm naturally objected to this breach of the contract made with him. The pastor, John Casper Cruciger, afterwards a member of the Reformed consistory at Heidelberg, sided with Boehm, as did the majority of the consistory. The consistory divided on the subject, six (the pastor and five others,) being in fiivor of Bcehm, and Schmidt, the president, with three others, against him. So this then was not accepted either by the minister, consistory or people. Schmidt became angered when his proposition was not accepted, and he set about making things uncomfortable for Boehm. He had his friends in the consistory, one of whom, named Basserman, became his willing tool. Schmidt persuaded Basserman to take the baptismal money at the next opportunity and put it in the alms box. So on May 14, 1711, when the child of the pastor was baptized, and one of the sponsors laid the bap- tismal fee on the table, Basserman went np and took it away in spite of the protests of those who were present. He repeated this several times, until on Monday after Pen- tecost fifteen members lodged complaint against him before 92 THE GEEMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. the consistory. Boehm also complaiucd there, not only about the baptismal fees, but because Bassermau had with- held his salary for eleven weeks, at which Bassermau became very angry and abusive. As Boehm could get no redress from the consistory, he appealed to the city council, July 6, 1711. His appeal was signed by the members of the church, wlio wished him to receive the fees. The council gave reply on July 17, that until the question was finally decided, the old custom should remain and Boehm should receive the fees. But Schmidt continued taking the fees away from Boehm, as he liad done before. On August 2 he took the fee, although it was wrapped up in paper, with Boehm's name written on it. And when Bcehm called his attention to the decision of the city council, he became as furious as Bassermau. The strife was kept up for several months. Boehm kept appealing, and the council kept giving decisions, but Schmidt kept on defying them. Finally, on November 2, 1711, they came to an agreement that the giving of baptismal fees was left optional with the people. In this agreement there was a clause which required Schmidt to give up the account books to the congregation. This he refused to do. He treated the minister just as he had treated Boehm, and there resulted a long conflict between the minister and himself, in which he jjursued the same tactics, but was finally defeated. Matters now remained (piiet for three years, until sud- THE EARLY LIFE OF BCEHM. 93 denly Schmidt found another opportunity to attack Boehm. According to the (ionstitntion of the congregation it was the duty of the deacons to provide the communion bread and bring it to the schoiibnaster, who was to cut it into pieces and place it on the communion table for the services. The communion was to be celebrated on August 5, 1714. Christopher Erb, a baker, was to provide the bread. He sent it on Saturday to Boehm's house. Boehm's wife received it and put it away in the cellar. Boehm was not at home at the time, and so did not give it any attention till the next morning, when, on trying to cut it, he found it too brittle to cut into slices. He therefore called to the minister, who lived next door, to know what to do. The latter said he was too busy to attend to the matter, and as it was the deacons' duty to look after it, he advised him to notify Erb. Boehm then sent to Erb for another loaf of bread. The latter sent him one just as brittle as the last, which he could no more cut than the former loaf. In desperation he at last cut enough rye bread, and it was used at the communion. Schmidt, who had not been in church for nineteen months, or to communion for four years, saw in this an opportunity to persecute Boehm. On August 29 he informed the pastor that the consistory w^ould like to hold a meeting, at which he should not be present. Boehm's friends in the consistory were also not invited. The remainder, a minority of the consistory (only four in number), held a meeting and constituted them-! 94 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. selves a committee of investigatioD. They even liad the audacity to borrow paper and ink from Boehm's house, when they proposed to investigate and try him. Erb was the first Avitness, and Boehm was then called in to testify. The four members then drew up a report. They then went through the congregation, and Avhen they had the matter sufficiently stirred up, they asked the pastor to call a congregational meeting, September 9, after the service. Cruciger tried to dissuade them, but they insisted. When Cruciger had retired, Schmidt opened the meeting with his report of investigation. His partisans made a number of speeches in favor of Boehm's dismissal. Some of the bet- ter members were so disgusted at the spirit of the meeting that they left. When the vote was taken, Schmidt declared Boehm was dismissed. The vote was a doubtful oue. This was the more likely, as Schmidt's adherents went about after the meeting to other members asking tliem to give their votes against Boehm. But at any rate Schmidt claimed that the congregation had dismissed Boehm. On Tuesday he notified Boehm that the congregation had dis- charged him, and demanded that he vacate the school- house within six weeks. But they had not reckoned on their host. Btehm, who always was a vigorous polemist when necessary, surprised them by saying : " In the first })lace, I do not accept my discharge from you. I demand that it be given in writ- ing, with the reasons for such action stated in full, because THE EARLY LIFE OF BCEIIM. 95 I shall lay the Avhole matter before the city council. Moreover you claim that you act in the name of the con- gregation, which must first be determined." At the next midweek meeting matters come to a climax. Btehm went to Cruciger in the morning to get the hymns for the ser- vice. The latter told him that the deacons had been with him, and had in the name of the congregation requested him not to allow Bcehm to lead the singing any longer. Boehm asked Cruciger whether he as pastor forbade him to lead the singing. Cruciger replied, " No." So Boehm went to church, and took his usual place. When, after the bells had been rung, he rose to read the Scriptures (for it was customary for the reader to begin service with read- ing of a chapter), and had not read many words, some one arose and in the name of the congregation told him to cease, as he had been discharged, Boehm replied : " I have not received a legal dismissal, and I do not accept it now." Then another member came up and closed the Bible before him, and would have taken it away, if Boehm had not held it with both hands. The result was a tumult among the congregation between Bcehm's friends and enemies. On September 14 Boehm laid the whole matter before the council of the city, who gave liim a favorable decision. The consistory not taking any notice of this, he again laid before the council a long statement of the whole matter, October 12, 1714. He demanded that his enemies be compelled to give their reasons for his dismissal in full, sq 96 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. he might reply to them. After another delay and repeated decrees of the city council, Schmidt and his party finally gave their reasons. The charges were mainly four, Avhicli Boehra amply refuted : 1. That he was a poor teacher, and his school was becoming smaller every day. He answered that that was not his fault, but theirs, as they had taken their children out of the school, and were influencing others to do so. He, however, claimed that his school was larger than that of his predecessor, as he had forty children of good families. 2. They charged him with discontinuing his private instructions. To this Bnehm replied that it had not been required of him in his call to hold them, and hence he could act in this matter as he thought best. 3. That Jewish children were taught in liis school Avith the Christian children. He said that that was not true, except that once or twice a Jewish child had come a little early and sat alongside of the other children. 4. His indistinct reading as a public reader in the church. He answered that it was strange they should make this charge, when they had him on trial six weeks before they first engaged him, and had had liiin now for six years, yet no one had discovered that charge till now. The city council deliberated about this for more than a year. Bcehm appealed to them again and again for a decision, but in vain. Schmidt evidently had considerable influence in the council. Finally Boehm became tired of THE EARLY LIFE OF BCEHM. 97 the suspense. He handed in his resignation, to take eifect on November 22, 1715, and accepted the position of school-teacher at Lambsheim, near Frankenthal. At Lambsheim there are some notices of him. On May 12, 1718, he made complaint there about the heathrights (these were the assignments of waste lands among the community) that they had been taken aAvay from him as schoolmaster two years before, and divided even among those who were not citizens. This he thought was unjust, as he had married the daughter of a citizen there and was himself a citizen and paid taxes on 150 florins assessment. He received 145 florins salary there, of which he had to pay quarterly forty-six kreutzers and four hellers as tax. He paid the first tax, June 17, 1717, in full, and again on August 27 and November 28. On May 6, 1718, the heathlots were distributed. He was again left out and appealed, but the assistant magis- trate said that if the pastors and schoolmasters were to be given lots, half the commons would have to be given them, and so he refused. Boehm therefore appealed to the su- preme court at Neustadt in the Palatinate. In tliis ap- peal he asked that the Reformed and Catholic ministers and schoolmasters might receive the same treatment as the other citizens (for the Catholics had made a similiar com- plaint)— that he be treated as the Catholic schoolmaster had been. The court replied by ordering the magistrates to treat all equally. On May 28 he again appealed to 7 98 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. them, stating that the magistrate had done nothing in his case, and so he would have to lose the expected crop in the vineyard, which had been given to the Reformed for many years, and had been planted by them, especially by pastor Mock, thirty years before. He therefore asked the court to aid him. The court ordered the chief magistrate, Ferbert, under penalty of ten imperial dollars, to inform the assistant magistrate that if the assignment were not made within a week, the domain would be fined. So Boehm gained his case. We find mention of Boehm in the town accounts as late as April 6, 1720, after which he seems t« have come to America.* The petition that Btehm's congregations sent to the classis of Amsterdam, July, 1728, which says that he was compelled to flee because of persecutions of the Catholics, does not seem to be borne out by those records that have been found. Still there is no doubt that the Rcfornied were under persecution in the Palatinate at the time ; and if so, Bcehni must have been indirectly a sufferer from them, even if no direct fact is found. For the Elector of the Palatinate in 1719 issued two edicts against the Re- formed, one (April 24) forbidding them to use the Heidel- * He seems to have married at Lambsheim a second time, his first wife having been Anna Maria Stehler, and his second Anna Maria Soberer. Four children were born to him at Worms, and baptized by Rev. Mr. Crucigcr — John Sabina, born May 2, 170'J; Francis Louis, July 24, 1711 ; John Chris- toph, May 4, ITlTi, died August, 1713, and Anthony William, April 27, 1714. THE EARLY LIFE OF BGEHM. 99 berg- Catechism, the other (August 26) taking the Church of the Holy Ghost at Heidelberg from them. The church was not given back to them until foreign princes, as those of Prussia, Hesse Cassel and England, retaliated on the Catholics. The persecution was, therefore, sufficiently great to attract the attention of these foreign princes, and lead them to severe measures. Not till February 29, 1720, did the Elector give back the Church of the Holy Ghost at Heidelberg to the Reformed. And even when Boohm left, the catechism was only provisionally permitted. Full liberty to use it was not granted to the Reformed until May 10, 1721, the year after he left. Of course, as the whole Palatinate was involved in this persecution, the words of Boehm's congregations in their petition were true. He with all the Reformed had suffered from the oppres- sions of a Catholic Elector, and therefore, like his fellow Palatines, he sought religious freedom in that land famous then in Germany for such liberty, namely Pennsylvania. CHAPTER III. THE CHURCH UNDER CONGREGATIONAL ORGANIZATION (1725-1747). The growth and development of the Church was gradual. lu its organization there came first, of course, the organization of the individual congregations or charges, and finally their union into a synod or coetus. The former ^vill be described in this chapter ; the latter in the next. John Philip Brehm had the honor of organizing the first German Reformed congregations in Pennsylvania. What Guldin might have done, had he been an organizer, Bwhm accomplished. Michael Schlatter has the other honor of being the founder of the synod or coetus, which organized the scattered Reformed congregations into a union. SECTION I. THE EARLY LABORS OF B(EHM. The early Reformed began coming to Pennsylvania in large crowds. Tlic unfitrtunatc experience of their friends in New York state led them to avoid New York for many years, while on the other hand the freedom and warm wel- come given to them in Pennsylvania drew large crowds thither. This emigration was aided by the large adver- THE EARLY LABORS OF BCEHM. 101 tising done by the various German Land Companies, who had taken up laud in Pennsylvania, and who sought emi- grants for their lands. It seems strange to us that for many years they speak of this colony as the " island of Pennsylvania." The founder of Pennsylvania, William Peun, had a warni place in his heart for the Reformed. He was favorable to thorn especiall}' for three reasons : 1. His mother was of the Reformed Church, it is said. She was a daughter of a Holland merchant named Jasper, a member of the Reformed Church at Rotterdam. She may indeed have had the value of a jasper in the eyes of her son, for she was ever his protectress when his father, Admiral Penn, became so incensed against him for going over to the Quakers. 2. He owed a very important part of his education to the Reformed. When his father sent him to France to get liim away from the influence of Quakers at home, Penn attended the Reformed University of Saunuu-, and from his training there he acquired not only a more liberal mind, but also a certain polish of manner which made him the Quaker courtier of th(! English court. 3. He counted among his warmest friends one of the most learned and pious Reformed princesses of that day, the Princess Elizabeth of the Palatinate, who was abbess of the Protestant abbey at Herford. There Penn had visited lier and held religious service in her house. So highly did he admire her Christian character that he placed her 102 THE GEEMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. among the saints of earth in his book, " No Cross, No Crown/' which lie wrote when imprisoned in the tower at London for being a Quaker.* Penn for these reasons owed a debt to the German Reformed, which he amply repaid by offering to them an asylum in Pennsylvania when they fled from war, oppres- sion and poverty. The Reformed began coming very early to Pennsyl- vania, and as the years rolled on the number of emigrants increased. When they arrived, they found that the Quakers had already taken possession of the best lands around Philadelphia, so they were compelled to go out beyond them toward what was then the wilderness. Tliev then beiran settling up the Perkiomeu Valley and northward along the Schuylkill Valley to Falkner Swamp (near Pottstown). Wheu these were pretty well settled, they pushed out farther into the Indian wilderness, settling south of the Blue Mountain, from Egypt on the east to Tulpehocken in the west, and down into the Conestoga districit in Tvan- caster county. The early Reformed, although they came without ministers and had no churches, must not be considered as an irreligious people. On the contrary, they were a relig- ious folk, many of them being refugees from religious ])er- secution. They had loved their Reformed faith so much * For an account of her life see " History of the Reformed Church of Ger- many," by Rev. James I. Good, D. D. THE EARLY LABORS OF BCEHM. 103 that they were willing to give up home and country on account of it. The religion for which they had sacrificed their old home was too dear to thcni to give up when they came to their new home in America. They, therefore, did not forget their God or the faith of their fathers, as alas so many German emigrants have done in this century. The German emigration of the last century may be set down as a very religious emigration — so religious that the tendency among them was rather to go off into religious excesses, as inspirationism or fanaticism, especially as there were almost no ministers to guide them. Being thus religious, they brought with them their Bibles, their cate- chisms, their hymn books, etc., many of which have come down to their descendants. In the wilderness they set up their tabernacles for worship. Where they were able to do so they would employ a parochial schoolmaster to teach their children. He would also hold a religious service by prayer, reading of sermon and singing. Or if the com- munity had no schoolmaster, they would sometimes choose one of their own number, whose integrity of life fitted him to be a religious leader, and he would hold worship for them. What they most missed were their sacramental privileges. Their children would remain unbaptized, and they would miss the communion of the Lord's Supper. At first some of them would p-o to communion with the Presbyterians in Philadelphia, and have their children baptized by the Presbyterian minister at Philadelphia, 104 THE GEE1SLA.N REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. Rev. Jedediah Andrews, D. T>., as he himself says in a letter. But it was very unsatisfactory, as they did not understand an English service well. Besides, most of them were poor, and could not aiford the journey to Phila- delphia, and so were not able to enjoy such privileges. So in course of time those living in the Schuylkill Valley north of Philadelphia became dissatisfied with their religious condition. As no Reformed minister was to be had, they finally prevailed on Mr. B(ehm to become their minister. (Shortly after his arrival he had begun holding religious services for them without salary in the capacity of a " reader." Tliis is an officer in the Dutch Church who holds services when there is no minister, and when there is a minister, he opens the services by reading the Scriptures.) He at first refused, because he had not been ordained. But they became most importunate. Henry Antes, the leading elder at Falkner Swamp, entreated him even with tears to accept a (;all so mani- festly providential. He finally accepted, " protesting before God that he could not justify his refusal of so neces- sary a work." The schoolmaster thus became the minis- ter by force of circumstances, and he organized the Re- formed north of Philadelphia into three- congregations. He first administered the communion at Falkner Swamp, October 15, 1725, to forty members; at Skii)])aek in No- vember to thirty-seven members, and at Wiiite Marsli, December 23, to twenty-four members. Falkner Swamp THE EARLY LABORS OF BCEHM. 105 is thus the oldest Reformed congregation still in existence, as Skippack afterwards became dormant (Schlatter declares it extinct) for a while, and White Marsh went to pieces after the death of William Dewees (Germantown, which was the oldest of them all, having since gone over to the Presbyterians). * Boehm proposed u full eliurcli constitution to these three congregations, which was adopted. This constitution fully reveals the thoroughly Reformed position of B(ehm. It was in every way Calviuistic. It was Calvinistic in its church government, for it organized the consistory thor- oughly; and the consistory was Calvin's contribution to the Reformed Church government. It also ordered strict church discipline, and imposed penalties on tliose who had proved unworthy of their Christian profession ; and church discipline has always been a peculiarly Calvinistic idea of government. In doctrine, as in government, it was thor- oughly Calvinistic. It accepted the creeds of the Reformed Church of Hollaud, such as the Canons of Dort. It also accepted the Heidelberg Catechism, thus showing that our catechism was recognized at the very beginning of our church organization as one of its syuibols. This constitution reveals that Breaehing al)ont the same time that Boehm did, luinicly in 1 72r>. Tempel- man thus describes the first beginnings of liis work in a letter sent to the Holland deputies, February 13, 1733 : "This church took its origin in the year 1725 at Chanes- CONEAD TEMPELMAN. 109 toka witli a small gathering here and there in houses, with the reading of a sermon and with singing and prayer, according to the German Reformed church order, upon all Sundays and holidays." He also says that on account of the lack of ministers they were without the administration of baptism and the Lord's Supper, The letter proceeds to .say that " Bcehm afterwards first voluntarily at the request of the members ministered to them once a year for two years baptism and communion, being satisfied with their voluntary gifts." Boehm subsequently established a church organization there after he had organized his own three congregations in the Schuylkill Valley, and Tempel- man was his schoolmaster, holding services between the semi-annual communions that Ba?hm celebrated with them. Boehm says when he first met Tempelman he noticed " nothing wrong, and had heard nothing against his life and walk, he was very watchful against sects, and his congregations were very much united." The letter of Tempelman in 1733 reports to Holland that the members of Conestoga district had separated them- selves into six preaching places. Three of them had been taken by Rev. John Peter Miller, who afterwards went over to the Seventh-day Dunkards, who had served them together with Tulpehocken. The remaining three congre- gations, as they could no longer be served by Boehm, on account of their great distance from him and his very heavy labor, asked the Holland synods to send them a 110 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. minister from Heidelberg. It is a very earnest letter, and is signed by three elders from each of the three congrega- tions. At the end of it they apologize for their simple and poor language, for which they ask the Holland synods to excuse them because they were not educated persons. For they are aware their letter is not drawn up according to the usual ecclesiastical requirements. On August 12, 1744, the union church at Quitopahilla was dedicated, and the day before the two congregations entered into an agreement with each other on twelve points. This was signed by 24 names, Tempelman as pastor, rej)- resenting the Reformed. Tempelmau's charge extended over to Muddy Creek, where he baptized, December 3, 1745, and also baptized in 1746. He administered the communion there, March 30, 1746, (Easter) and admitted ten to the Church. Besides laboring at the Grubben and Hill clnu'ches, he also labored at Swatara, some baptisms of his being recorded there as early as 1740. So great was the attat^lunent of his people to him be- cause of his earnest preaching and pious life, that Avhen Schlatter came into their midst, they did not give him the most kindly reception, because they loved their old miu- ister so much, and did not wish liim to be displaced. Schlatter says in his journal, June, 1747, " Up to this time these congregations, Muddy Creek, Cocalico, Wliite Oaks, have been served by a certain tailor from Heidelberg, named Tempelman, whom the people some twenty years CONEAD TEMPELMAN. Ill ago urged to this service, tliey being willing to be instructed and comforted by a pious layman, rather than be wholly without the public service of God. This man who is nearly sixty years of age, is reported of by the con- gregation as a man of correct views, quiet and peaceable in his spirit, by which he has won the love and respect of the community. After I had administered the Lord's Supper, I asked him to preach the thanksgiving sermon, to which I listened with pleasure and edification, as being well adapted to the circumstances of the people. He of his own accord ojffered that he would cheerfully vacate the post, to which the necessity of the circumstances had called him, as soon as a regidar minister should be secured for these congregations ; but at the same time asked that he might be placed in such circumstances that as a regularly constituted minister he might conduct the holy service in the congregations of Quitopahilla, Swatara, Donegal, etc. He resides at Swatara, where he has a family and a })iece of land. I am of the opinion that when he shall have been ordained according to the order of the Church, he could labor there with good fruit."* As the t\vo founders of the German Reformed C-hurch, Bcehm and Tempelman, were laymen, it brings into prom- inence the thought that the Reformed Church owes a debt * A picture of hia house in which he held the first services is in the posses- sion of the Reformed congregation at Lebanon, who )}aye kindly )o^;ne4 it to the author of this book. 112 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. to the laity. She should, therefore, give promineuce to them in their work, and uot try to suppress them. This origin of the Eeformed through the laity gives a special emphasis to the idea that the ministry are |not a separate class appointed to do some other work than the laity. All of God's people are priests. " Ye are a holy priesthood," says the Apostle Peter. And the watchword of the Refor- mation Churches, both Lutheran and Reformed, was the priesthood of all believers. Our Church in Pennsylvania owes its origin to the pious laymen. Let us honor Boehm, the founder, and Tempelman, his assistant, and let us give the laity a large sphere in the activities of the Church. And may the example of our founders be an inspiration to the members of our churches to be as active and devoted as Bcelim and Tempelman were, so that, as they earnestly seek and lay hold of present opportunities, through them many congregations may be founded, and thus the Church be greatly enlarged. ~;>7,-?-;7'/ /;^_43^;^i^2^ '5f^l^^s^^i|^ii^_:^: 'j^j i:i'l'lN(.KN;_(tlie 1-nthi.lace of Weiss). WF.INHEIM (the birthplace ..f Tempelman). THK l,IN/i;ili:ilI. CHURCH AT SI'. GALL i«1il.x- S, hl.iitcr prcachetl) CHAPTER III.— SECTION III. REV. GEORGE MICHAEL WEISS AND THE FOUNDING OF THE PHILADELPHIA CONGREGATION. Rev. George Michael Weiss was baptized at Eppingen, in the Palatinate, January 23, 1700. His father was John Michael Weiss, a tailor from Gross Engersheim, in Wurtemberg. His mother, his father's second wife, was Maria Frank, of Bretten.* He studied at the university at Heidelberg, having matriculated there, October 18, 1718, as a student of philosophy, from Eppingen, in the Palatinate. In 1725 he was ordained at Heidelberg.f He came to America 1727, sent (as the Memorial of the Holland synods of 1730 puts it) by the Palatinate con- sistory. He showed his diploma and appointment by the Palatinate consistory, dated May 1, 1727, which was renewed l)y that consistory April 26, 1728. On his way to America he passed through Holland, and sailed from Rotterdam, but does not seem to have come into contact with the Holland Church. Its attention had not yet *The Ephrata Chronicle is wrong about the place of his birth, when it says Stebbach. Stebbach was, however, only two or three miles east of Eppingen, and both were in the neighborhood of Bretten, the birth- jilace cf Melancthon. fDubbs' History of the Reformed Church, page 255. 8 114 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. been called to the Pennsylvania Germans, as was done the next year. He lauded at Philadelphia, September l.S, 1727, in the ship William aud Sarah, which had on it four hundred German emigrants, and he took the oath of allegiance September 21. He found a number of Ger- man Reformed in Philadelphia, to whom B(ehm had occasionally preached before he arrived. (Btehm seems to have been the first to preach to the Reformed in Penn- sylvania in almost all of the oldest congregations. He was a true missionary). Weiss celebrated the communion with them the week after his arrival, and organized the congregation soon after (before the end of 1727) by the election of a consistory. Peter Lecolie, John William Roerig, Henry Weller and George Peter Hiliegass were elected 'elders. He also began the organization of a new churcn at Skippack, near which, in the Perkiomen valley, at Gosheuhoppen, lived Frederick Hiliegass, who had been his companion on the sea voyage. Hiliegass first took Weiss up the country, and on their way they visited Boehm, at his farm, at Witpen. Weiss' friends in the Perkiomen valley wanted him to preach fi)r them, which lie did. And a number of the Skippack congregation, which had hitherto been served by Bcehm, now became dis- satisfied with the latter and wanted W^eiss for their pastor, as he was ordained, and Btehm was not. Weiss preached there for the first time, October 19, 1727, and organized a consistory composed of Wendell Keiber, Gerhart In de KEV. GEORGE MICHAEL WEISS. 115 Haven, Christopher Schmidt and Geoige Reiif. This party having split from Boehm's congregation, led by Jacob Reiff, completed a church already began, and in it Weiss preached. It was located on Reift's ground, so that the latter had control of it, and they afterward pre- vented Bcehm from preaching to the congregation in it or having anything to do with its dedication, (June 22, 1729). Weiss also preached at Germantowu, as his later recon- ciliation with Boehm says. He also preached at Goshen- hoppeu and administered the Lord's Supper there on October 12, 1727. Weiss seems to have been a young man of more than ordinary promise, as the following note in the Philadel- delphia Mercury, in 1730, shows : " This is to give notice that the ■ subscribe! hereof, being desirous to be as generally useful as he can ,n this country (wherein he is a stranger), declares his willingness to teach logic, natural philosophy, metaphysics, etc., to all such as are willing to learn. The place of teaching will be widow Sprocgel's on Second street, where he will attend, if he has encouragement, three times a week for that exercise. " Signed by G. M., " Mini-ster of the Reformed Palatinate church."* It seems that although Weiss was a regularly ordained * This extract is not from the Mercury of 1729, as heretofore supposed, but from that paper of 1730. The first three insertions are signed by only G. M. In the advertisement of March 12, his full name, George Michael Weiss, appears, as it does in the four following insertions. 116 THE GERMAN REF.ORMED CHURCH IN U. S. Reformed minister, and had a Latin certificate to that effect with him, yet discredit was thrown upon it. So to satisfy his critics he, on December 2, wrote back to the Palatinate consistory, at Heidelberg, for a German certifi- cate. At the same time his letter also gave to them an account of the condition of church affairs in Pennsylvania. They reply to him by not only sending him a German certificate, dated April 26, 1728, and signed by Professor L. C. Mieg, the prominent theologian of Heidelberg Uni- versity, and the head of the consistory, but they also sent with the certificate a letter dated April 27, also signed by Mieg as president of the consistory. The certificate reads as follows : " AVhcreas, Mr. George Michael AVeiss, born at Ep- pingen in the electoral Palatinate, and at prescait stationed as a Reformed minister at Philadelphia, in Pennsylvania, under date of the third of December of the last year gave information to the Ecclesiastical Council of the Palatinate concerning the present condition of religious and ecclesias- tical affairs there ; "And, whereas, on this occasion he gave us to under- stand that (although he had received from this council a Latin certificate), he needs also a certificate in German, because of the difficult circumstances in which he is placed, and specially on account of those who do not understand Latin ; "Therefore, We testify as we did before, that he is not only right-minded in doctrine and unblamable in life, peace-loving and sociable in his walk and conversation, REV. GEORGE MICHAEL WEISS. 117 but also edifying in bis manifold discourses preached before us. Wc have no doubt but that, if the Lord grant him life and health, he will prove useful and be the means of edifying many souls. The infinitely good and merciful God and Father extend to him light and strength in full measure from the fulness of his grace which is in Christ Jesus, that the received word of the Lord may, by his ser- vice, make great progress, that even tlie minds of the heathen may be turned to the Lord, and that their kings may be brought. "Heidelberg, April 26, 1728. "L. C. MiEG, " Councillor and Director of the Electoral Church Council Consistory." Rev. Dr. Jedediah Andrews, the pastor of the Presby- terian church in Piiiladelphia, also speaks highly of him in a letter of October 14, 1730. He says : " There is in this province avast mumber of Palatines, and they still come in every year. Those that have come of late are mostly Presbyterians, or, as they call them- selves. Reformed. They did use to come to me for bap- tism, and many have joined with us in the other sacra- ment. They never had a minister till nine years ago, who is a bright young man and a fine scholar."* * The reference of this letter "nine years ago" is hard to exphiin. Dr. Weiser refers it to Boobm, who came to Pennsylvania in 1720. But Andrews' letter has no reference to Boehm at all. Mr. J. F. Sachse, of Philadelphia, one of our best state historians, claims to have found at Weiss' home evidence that Weiss' trip to America in 1727 was his second trip, not his first. But this is as yet unproved. It seems hardly likely, however, for several reasons. One is that Weiss in his report to the Synod of South Holland in \7'M) does not speak of an earlier visit. And again Boehm, when he refers to it, speaks of only one visit of Weiss to America. If the latter had come to America in 118 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. Weiss was quite active before he went to Europe in 1730, as we shall see in the next chapter. One fact more in his life we will, however, mention here. He published (1729) what was probably the first book published by the German Eeformed in the new world. It was entitled " The minister who had wandered in the American wilder- ness among men of various Nations and Religions, and who has been variously attacked," etc.* It was published by Andrew Bradford, Philadelphia. It was a small work, only 29 pages, yet books published in the days of the in- fant colony were many of them small. The book has become lost, no copy having been found as yet. It was directed against the sect of the New-Born. This sect had become quite numerous in Oley, Berks county, which seems to have been a seething cauldron of religious ideas and novelties in those days, from the Inspirationisra of Gruber, to the Universalism ot De Benneville, M. D. Some of the New Born had also settled in the neighbor- 1721, there is little likelihood tliat Hcchm would have bpen called as minister by his people, because then they would have had a Reformed minister among them in Weiss. Besides, Weiss' ordination did not take place till 1725, or several years after Andrews reports him here. Hence his coming in 1721 is very unlikely. * The full German title is as follows: Georg Michael Weiss, V. D. M , der in der Americanischcn Wildniisz unter Menschen von verschiedenen Nationen und Religionen hin und wieder gewandelte und verschiedentlich Angefochtene Prediger. Abgemahlet und vorgcstellet in einem (iespraeoh niit einem Poli- tico und Nengeborenen Verschiedene Stiick, insonderheit die Neugeburt betreffende. Verfertigt und zu Befoerderung der Ehr Jesu selbst aus cigener Erfahrung an das Licht gebracht. 8 vo. Title and hymn III.-V., text I.-29 pp. Published by Andrew Bradford, Philadelphia, 1729. REV. GEORGE MICHAEL WEISS. 119 hood of Germantown in 1723. They believed in sinless perfection in this life. Their leader was Matthew Bow- man, born at Lambsheim, from where Boehm came in Pennsylvania. They became so outspoken that their disputations were heard in the markets of Philadelphia, whither these country people went to bring produce for sale. On one occasion Bowman proposed to walk across the Delaware river. He was very bold in his attacks, giving special trouble to Beissel, the mystic of Ephrata. It was against this early tendency on the part of many of the Germans that Weiss set himself. Just as Boehm in his controversy with the Moravians, so Weiss set himself against any influence that would divide the Reformed. And in doing so he reveals his ability as well as his zeal for his Reformed faith. CHAPTER III.— SECTION IV. THE ORDINATION OF B(EHM. The arrival of Weiss was a o;aiu to the Reformed, for it gave them another minister. But it also proved to be an element of discord. This at first seemed to be an evil, but divine providence overruled it, as it always does, so that it became a blessing. It produced friction at first between Weiss and Boehm, but finally led to the happy result that Boehm became an ordained minister. W^eiss had hardly arrived before he began to work most actively among the German Reformed. He celebrated the communion with the Philadelphia congregation soon after landing, at the urgent desire of the people, and before he preached to any of the other Reformed congregations. He seems to have been led in the choice of his fields of labor largely by those who came over with him in his vessel. Thus, at the request of Hillegass, who came over with him, he v/ent and preached at Skippack. He was afterwards led to do the same thiuy; at Conestosra. This caused friction with Boehm, for both of those congrega- tions were served by him. Weiss and his followers declared that Boehm's course in preaching without ordina- tion was irregular and wrong. On the other hand, Boehm THE ORDINATION OF BCEHM. 121 complained that Weiss was interfering in his congrega- ious, which up to the time of Weiss' coming had been in entire harmony with him. The first sign of trouble between Boohni and Weiss was a letter which the latter wrote to a Mr. Schwab, of Conestoga, October 2, 1727, in which he declared that Boehra had usurped the authority of a minister which did not belong to him, and claimed he could not conscien- tiously recognize him as a minister. He offered to come there and celebrate the Lord's Supper, if they desired it. This he seems to have done to several who had come over the sea with him. Weiss also entered another of Boehm's congregations, namely Skippack, of which Goshenhoppen was then an outlying district. He administered the com- munion at Goshenhoppen on October 12. Ba>hm com- plains against Weiss that he administered the communion without any examination of the members before com- munion, such as was customary among the Reformed, and that he liad admitted to the communion some of Bcehm's congregation at Falkner Swamp, who were under disci- pline. At Goshenhoppen, Skippack (where he preached October 19), and also at Philadelphia (where he preached on October 26), Weiss declared publicly that Boehm was incompetent to perform the ministerial office. The Luth- eran minister at Skippack and Goshenhoppen — Henkel — aided Weiss against Boehm, and announced Weiss' preach- ing services. 122 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. Weiss also attempted to get into the cougregation at White Marsh. He sent to them stating that he would come and preach for them, if they would send him a horse for the journey. One of the elders did so, supposing that Weiss had arranged with Ba?hni ahout the matter. But when the other elders learned what this elder had done without their knowledge, quite a tumult arose. Weiss also entered a fourth of Boehm's congregation at Oley, where he performed some baptisms. Boehm charges him with baptising some Indian children whose parents were still heathen. Boehm's friends at White Marsh and Falkner Swamp prevented Weiss from gaining much of a foothold in these two congregations. Weiss seems to have been thoroughly convinced in his mind that B(fihm's whole course was wrong. He not only tried to stop his preaching at the points named, but on November 28 he wrote Boehm a letter summoning him to Philadelphia to an examination for the ministry. This letter is so remarkable that we give it in full : "Greetings to you, my specially honored sir and friend. Inasmuch as the great God is not a God of discord, but of order, and as He therefore demands that in the Christian Church everything should be disposed in accordance with the apostolic order, but whereas it is well known that in many cases the gentleman has acted in a manner contrary to this order ; since without inquiry or per- mission of the clergy, taking into account that this is a free country, he has undertaken such important office singly THE ORDINATION OF RCEHM. 123 and solely at the iuvitatiou of the people, not being exam- ined as to his proficiency by such men as are able to pass judgment, much less having submitted to an ordination, nay, having all the time dissuaded the people from de- manding a clergyman, not to speak of his neglect to tea(!li the catechism for the benefit of the young and old, and of his admitting to the Lord's Supper children at once, without giving them any premonition or instruction ; and also when I first came to this country having received me in a manner I cannot explain otherwise than by supposing that he cares for nothing so much as for his vain reputa- tion and his own advantage, not to mention here for the present many other things ; now, therefore, by the authority of the Most Rev. Ministry, and according to the power accorded one as a regular servant of Christ, the gentleman is herewith summoned and requested to appear in Philadelphia before the presbyterium (consistory) of the church at the house of the minister in order to be examined by one or another of those being present. " With the recommendation of God, " I remain yours, " G. M. Weiss, V. D. M. " Philadelphia, November 28, 1727." Boohm did not, however, obey this invitation for. an examination. It is almost needless to say that Weiss had not sufficient authority to do this. As a single minister he had no right to examine Boohm, neither had his consis- tory, before whom he summoned him. But then young ministers sometimes make mistakes in church law, espec- ially when carried away by zeal. On February 11, 1728, 124 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. Peter and Michael Hillegass and Micliael Schmidt, of Philadelphia, came to the congregation at Skippack and tried to induce the members to subscribe towards the sal- ary of Weiss (and give up subscribing to Boehra's salary). On March 10 Weiss and these three came again to Skip- pack, when it was Boehm's Sunday to preach. Quite a number of the congregation who were followers of Weiss, led by the two Hillegass brothers and Schmidt, gathered at the home of Jacob Reiff, where it had been customary to hold the services, as the congregation as yet had no church building. When Boehm appeared they would not let him enter the house, and j)revented him from holding religious services that day. A great crowd had assembled, expecting trouble between the two factions, and there were heated arguments, which finally led to a tumult. Boehm was tiius compelled to iiold his services after that in the houses of those in the congregation who were friendly to him. The final and culminating act of this controversy occurred in the next year, June 22, 1729, wlien the new church at Skippack was dedicated. Tliis church building had been started and most of the money contributed by Boehm's party. But ReifF in some way or other succeeded in obtaining a title to the land, and hence claimed it as his own because it was located on his property. As Weiss writes to Heidelberg soon after arriving for a German certificate, we suspect that Boehm's party were THE ORDINATION OF BCBHM. 125 the ones wbo cast reflections on Weiss' Latin certificate of ordination, and so also on Weiss' authority as a minister. When the answer carae from Heidelberg, probably in the summer of 1728, giving the testimonial of Weiss and his German certificate, it put the Boehm party on the defen- sive. It compelled Boehm and his party to do something. What could they do ? They very wisely decided that the best course was to apply to some religious body to ordain Boehm. But to whom could they go ? They might have applied to the Presbyterian Synod at Philadelphia, as Miller did afterwards. But Boehm was so intensely Re- formed that nothing but an ordination by a Reformed body would answer. The only Reformed in America to whom he could appeal were the Dutch Reformed at New York. He and his consistories of Falkner Swamp, White Marsh and Skippack therefore applied to them. He might have applied to the nearest Dutch minister, Rev. Theodore J. Frelinghuysen, on the Raritan, New Jersey, but Boehm was not in sympathy with Frelinghuysen's inclination toward Pietism, which afterwards led him to enter heart and soul into the AVhitfield movement. So Boehm passed over Frelinghuysen and applied to the Re- formed ministers of New York, Gualther Du Bois, Henry Boel and their neighbor on Long Island, A^iuccnt Anton- ides. Bcehm's consistories in making this application state the unusual conditions under which they persuaded Boehm 126 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U, S. to become their minister, even though he had not been ordained. They express great sorrow of heart for having acted irregularly. They bear testimony to his work, say- ing that he had served them faithfully for three years. They say that he had the reputation among them of being a man of more than common knowledge in the sound doc- trine of truth, of praiseworthy life and exemplary zeal. They enclose a copy of Boehm's constitution for the con- gregations of his charge, so as to show that they were thor- oughly Reformed, and they say that Boehm was willing, if they would send a minister from Holland, to return to his former position in the church as reader. Tiiey, how- ever, express fear that if Boehm should desist from the ministry, their congregations would fall into a worse state than they then were, especially because of the influence of the Quakers and the sects, and that then great confusion would ensue, because he had already baptized two hundred children, whose baptism would thus be irregular.* * There is a rather amusing story of the complications that might grow out of such circumstances. One of the Moravian bishops, Cammerhof, tells the story that there was a Dutch Reformed congregation in the Minnisink (Monroe county, Pa.,) which had for its minister a Mr. Freymuth. For sev- eral years he had baptized children, married couples and performed other ministerial acts, claiming that he was regularly ordained. After Schlatter's arrival in Philadelphia in 1746, being convinced that his former ecclesiastical ordination had no validity, he, following 15a-hm's e.xample, applied to the Classis of Amsterdam for ordination, which request was granted. At the e>ame time he received an order to rebaptize all those children whom he had baptized before, because they were not properly baptized. He read this from the pulpit, and it caused the greatest confusion. Some of his members sub- mitted, others demanded back the baptismal fe°s, because, according to his own confession, they had not received the value of their money. THE ORDINATION OF BCEHM, 127 Boehm and William Dewees went to New York, May 16, 1728, to lay this matter before the New York ministers. These told Btehra that they had no authority to ordain hizn, but they reeomniendcd that he make ap- plication to the classis of Amsterdam in Holland, under whose authority the New York consistory stood, and sub- mit to their ecclesiastical decision. This Boehm and his consistories did, July, 1728, after having sent out a full statement of the circumstances that led to their call to Boehm. They also sent a copy of Boehm's constitution. Their letter was signed by 16 names of the consistories of his three congregations. The New York ministers en- dorse this petition in a letter of August 15 to the classis. Correspondence was slow in those days. And the Dutch were slow. We do not know how soon these let- ters arrived at Holland, but the first mention of them in the acts of the classis is on November 14, 1728, when they are reported as having been received. The classis request- ed its commissioners on foreign affairs to write comfort- ingly to Boehm's congregations and assure them of a fur- ther consideration of their cause, and of a reply in the future. They appointed a committee of two ministers who knew German to assist the foreign committee. These classical commissioners wrote to the New York ministers on December 1, 1728, stating that they postponed action, because the matter was too important to be acted on speed- ily. On the same date they wrote to Boehm's consistories, 128 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. stating that classis accepted their letters and would con- sider the matter carefully. They assured tliem of their sympathy, but asked time to consider so important a sub- ject. This letter was read by Boehm to his congregations. It caused great joy, and it had the effect of checking their opponents in casting slurs on Boehm' ordination. The committee appointed by classis reported January 11, and their action was adopted, but no opportunity seems to Iiave come to them to send a letter, and so it was not written till June 20, 1739. There seems to have been an aspect of the matter that had troubled the classis somewhat, namely, whether they had the right to go ahead without waiting for the synod to act on so important a matter. This they finally decided to do. (It would have altered matters in Pennsylvania history considerably if they had done so, for by this action of the classis B«hm was iso- lated from the synod for many years ; whereas if it had been sent to tlie synod with their favorable notice, he would have been brought to the attention of the synods. The action came to be looked upon as a classical affair, whik' if it had gone to synod, Weiss and Reiff would not have been able to prejudice the South Holland Synod against Boehm as they afterwards did.) So finally, on June 20, the classis gave their decision, botli to the New York ministers and to the Pennsylvania congregations. They declared that they found in the circumstances in Pennsylvania by which Boehm entered THE ORDINATION OF BCEHM. 129 the ministry the elements of a true call to the ministry, although all the formalities of it had not been gone through with. They, therefore, ordered that his minis- terial acts be considered lawful, but that he must submit to ordination, provided he accepted the Heidelberg Cate- chism, submitted to tlie Canons of Dort, and would main- tain correspondence with the classis of Amsterdam. They did not wish, however, that Boehm's case should be con- sidered a precedent for any other unordained men to begin the ministry and afterwards apply to them for ordination. The classis approved of his constitution drawn up for his congregations. They placed the ordination into the hands of the New York ministers. These could ordain him either by going to Pennsylvania or by his coming to New York, or by both going to some midway point. They also wrote to Boehm, commending his work and urging him to greater activity when he had been ordained, and prayed God's blessing on his work. This decision Boehm's congregations, having received it on September 4, by express from New York, readily accepted, November 4. Each of the three consistories sent a representative to go with Boehm to New York, Frederick Antes, of Falkner Swamp, Gabriel Schuler, of Skippack, and William Dewees, of White Marsh. The Dutch consistory of New York held a meeting, November 18, at which all these matters came up and were discussed, and the delegates of Boehm's congregations, and Boehm 9 130 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. himself, agreed to accept the Dutch confessions. The con- sistory, therefore, (November 20) ordered his ordination, but with this stipulation, that this act should not serve as a precedent for future ordinations. On Sunday afternoon, November 23, Boehm was solemnly ordained by Rev. Henry Boel and Rev. Gualther Du Bois. This ordination became also the scene of a reconcilia- tion of Boehm and Weiss, who had come to New York and been present at the ordination. It seems that Weiss, before this, had been writing to the New York ministers against Boehm as an irregular minister. But they had been answering his positions point by point. Weiss then went to New York and was tliere heard and answered by them. At the ordination he expressed regret at what lie had done and his willingness to make complete Cliristian satisfaction. This led to the reconciliation. The recon- ciliation took place on November 24, the day atter Boehm's ordination. The differences between them seem to have been honest differences. AVeiss says : " I cannot conscien- tiously re(!Ognize Boehm as a Reformed minister till he submits to an examination and is ordained properly." Weiss was right de jure ; B(ehm de facto. Weiss was constitutionally riglit in claiming that an unordained minister should not perform ministerial acts, l^oehm, however, was right in fact, for the circumstances had compelled him to exercise his ministry. Weiss on his THE ORDINATION OF BCEHM. 131 part now agreed to respect Boehm as a regularly ordained minister, and promised to stay away from Skippack, and leave it and the other two congregations, Falkuer Swamp and White Marsh, to Boehm ; while Boehm agreed to leave to the ministry of Weiss, Philadelphia and Germantown. This reconciliation was signed by the representatives of Boehm's congregations as well as by Boehm. Weiss signed it alone. In this effort at reconciliation Weiss stood alone ; none of his congregations or members sup- ported him in it. It must have required a good deal of courage for him to thus stand out against his congre- gations. Indeed, even though he here agreed to the reconcilia- tion, his congregation at Skippack never agreed to it. They protested against the ordination of Boehm in a letter of May 10, 1730, to the synod, urging them to use their authority against the classis to nullify the ordination of Btelim. The classis took up the matter and on December 5, 1730, wrote to them an earnest letter expressing deep regret at their course in dividing so new a congregation ; but they refused to nullify Boehm's ordination, as they had requested. Classis urged them to become reconciled to Boehm, and also wrote to Boehm's congregations at Skip- pack, Falkner Swamp and White Marsh, urging them to live in harmony with their opponents at Skippack. On the same date they wrote to Boehm, urging him to be kind to his opponents, exchange with Weiss, and thus 132 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. bring about unity. The New York ministers wrote to classis, November 2, 1730, defending Boehm against the attacks of his enemies at Skippack. They report to clas- sis that Skippack had refused to read the letter of classis asking for harmony. Boehm complains, January 29, 1730, to the New York ministers about Weiss' actions after the reconciliation. The Skippack congregation in its letter to Holland bears witness that Weiss had coun- selled them to live in peace with Bcehm, but there is no doubt that just before he went to Europe in 1730 he cele- brated the communion with the Skippack congregation. Weiss in this letter reveals considerable independence of spirit over against his own congregations, and also a sense of fairness in being satisfied when matters were made right by Boehm's ordination, even though the pressure of the influence of his adherents at Skippack led him to go there just before going to Europe. On the other hand, Boehm reveals a beautiful spirit in being willing to accept the reconciliation with Weiss after the severe aspersions the latter had cast upon him and his work ; and also reveals his humility and zeal for the Reformed Church by offering before ordination to step aside and give place to some one else as minister whom the Holland Chun^h would send. It only remains to be noticed that by these ordination proceedings Boehm and his three congregations agreed to become subordinate to the classis of Amsterdam and the THE ORDINATION OF BCEHM. 133 Church of Holland, and accept the canons and constitu- tion of Dort. Weiss did the same, and he also agreed to try to bring, if possible, his congregation at Philadelphia into subordination to the Church of Holland. Thus the official connection of the Church in Holland with the Pennsylvania Reformed began in 1728, when the classis of Amsterdam accepted the appeal of Boehm. The Ger- man Reformed of Pennsylvania from this time up to 1793 were under the Reformed Church of Holland. CHx\PTER III.— SECTION V. THE JOURNEY OF WEISS AND REIFF TO EUROPE. In 1730 Weiss took a journey to Europe, thus leaving Boelim the only German Reformed pastor in Pennsylvania. He accompanied his warm friend, Jacob Reilf, of Skip- pack, (who had been in Europe in 1727, but had returned in 1729). There has hitherto been some uncertainty about Weiss' journey to Europe, but all is now clear. The journey was not made in 1729, as heretofore sup- posed, but in 1730. Weiss was in Philadelphia in the spring of 1730, for his advertisement, as given in the last chapter, appeared in the Philadelphia Mercury from February 10th, eight times up to April 9th. The power of attorney given by the Philadelphia congregation to Weiss and Reiff, was dated May 19th, 1730, so that he must have sailed some time in May. This power of attorney was given to Reiff*, as it was somewhat uncertain whether AVeiss would return to America. By it Reiff was ordered to receive the money collected in Europe, and, if Weiss did not return to Pennsylvania again, to bring another minister from Heidelberg. They were both of them authorized by the congregations to collect money for the congregations at Philadel])hia and Skij^j^ack. JOURNEY OF AYEISS AND REIFF TO EUROPE. 135 Tlicy arrived in Hollaiul about the first of July, for we find them in attendanc^e at the South Holland synod, July 4-14, at Breda. Providenee had been moving on the Reformed Church of Holland in a strange way to make it take up the poor LViuisylvania churches. We behold here the cross pur- poses of providence. I'^roni two directions came the call to them in the same year (1728). In that year, as we have seen, Boehra and his consistories appealed to the classis of Amsterdam for ordination. In that very same year, although about a half a year before, the Palatinate consistory, at Heidelberg, asked the synod of South Hol- land to take the Pennsylvania Germans under their care. At this synod (July G— 16) the president read a letter from the Heidelberg consistory "■ asking that the Holland Church, on account of the great poverty of the Palatinate Church, take the Pennsylvania cougregations under their care." Tiiat consistory, which on June 27, 1709, seemed to o})i)ose the coming of the Palatines, now accepted the inevitable, and determined to do something for them. It had sent Weiss at the head of a colony in 1727, and later sent Rieger at the head of a (Milony in 1731. We are some- what suspicious that the report of the churches in Penn- sylvania (which Weiss gave the Palatinate consistory, when he wrote for a German certificate of his ordination) stirred up the Palatinate consistory ; for that letter was probably received by them just before they wrote to Holland. 136 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. Thus from Germany, and also from across the sea, in America, came the Macedonian call to the Holland Church to come over and help. There is, however, this difference to be noticed : Boehm appealed to the classis of Amsterdam, which belonged to the North Holland synod ; while the Palatinate consistory appealed to the South Holland synod, through whose territory most of the Germans passed in sailing down the river Rhine, past Rotterdam, Dort, etc. The South Holland synod at once took up the matter. It recommended the Pennsvlvania conoreoations to the Holland churches, and urged its classes to take up a collection for them. This at the next year was reported to be $278.64, for Pennsylvania. The coming of Weiss and Reiff brought matters to a focus, as they arrived just in time to attend the synod at Breda, July 4-14. They evidently had reported to the deputies first, for the deputies reported to the synod that Weiss and Reiff appeared before them. The deputies with the committee of the classis of Delft and Shieland (Rotterdam) bring in a report. The synod received the report, and ordered it to be printed, if possible, during the sessions of the synod, so that copies miglit be delivered to the council of the provinces, to each member of the synod, and to those of tlieir number who went as cor- respondents to other synods, to present the matter to them. It was published, entitled, " Re])()rt and Organiza- tion Concerning the Colony and Church of Pennsylvania. JOURNEY OF WEISS AND REIFF TO EUROPE. 137 Prepared and Published by the Deputies of the Christian Synod of South Holkind, Together with the Committee of the Classis of Delft and Delftland and Shicland." It is very interesting, because it is the first official Reformed account of Pennsylvania. It has been suggested that AVeiss wrote this report. This is not true, as the acts of the synod show. It was composed by the deputies and the committee of those two classes, after conference with Weiss and Reiff, and based on their statements. It, there- fore, emphasizes the needs of the two congregations for which Weiss and ReiflP were appointed to collect, Philadel- phia and Skippack, and entirely ignores all the congrega- tions of Boehm. This report of the deputies consisted of two parts, the report about Pennsylvania and the regulations concerning the organization of the church. The report is quite an elaborate and clear description of Pennsylvania. It has a brief preface which states its object. This was two-fold — to incite the Holland Churches to benevolence for the Penusylvania congregations, and to show the Pennsylvania congregations how they shoidd be organized, so as to be in accordance with God's Word and the Reformed customs. The report describes Pennsylvania, its climate, products and minerals, speaking of it as still largely a wilderness inhabited by wild beasts and Indians. It briefly gives its history under the Swedes and then under Penn, whose invitiition had been accepted by many Germans of various 138 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. denominatious and sects. It reports the number of Reformed at 15,000, half of the whole German population in the eolony. These were without religious privileges, and were therefore attracted toward the Quakers. The only Reformed church it mentions is the one at Skippack. (We are surprised that it does not even mention Philadel- l)hia, for which Weiss was asked to collect, and it entirely ignores Boehm's Avork in his five congregations). It describes the deplorable condition of the Reformed, as they were Avithout pastors, and yet their number was con- tinually increasing. It then speaks of the possibility that through the Germans the conversion of the Indians might be hoped for, as the latter were on very friendly terms with the Germans, because they had been kind to them. It further declares that this Church in Pennsylvania, if fos- tered, might become an asylum or refuge for the Holland- ers in case they were ever persecuted again, as they had been by the king of Spain. It closes by stating that the log or frame church at Skippack ought to be replaced by a stone church, and that in addition to Skipj)ack four other chin-ches ought t<^) be built, so that the religious needs of the Pennsylvania Germans migiit be provided for. The regulations are also elaborate, tliough not so imj)()rtant, as tluy were never put into eifect. Yet they show the interest of the Dutch in planning large things for t\\(i Pennsylvania Reformed in the future, and reveal the largeness of vision of the Dutch which came to be ful- JOURNEY OF WEISS AND EEIFF TO EUROPE. 139 filled many years after. It organized the Pennsylvania churches under consistories, giving (|uite minute directions about the ministers, elders, deacons and school-masters. It even goes further, by preparing for the organization of classes. One of the most interesting points about it is its ^ regulation about creeds. The ministers, elders, deacons and school-masters were required to subscribe no less than five creeds : 1. The Heidelberg Catechism ; 2. The Palatinate confession of faith ; 3. The Canons of Dort, as received by the Palatinate ministers in harmony with other nations ; 4. The post acta of the synod of Dort ; 5. The Formula of Concord (meaning the three creeds of the Holland Clmrch, The Heidelberg Catechism, Belgic Confession and Canons of Dort). This would make the Pennsvlvanians amenable to all the creeds of the Holland Church. The Holland fathers were always very careful about the orthodoxy of the early Reformed in regard to . Calvinism. If they gave their money to help them, they felt a responsibility that it did not go to aid any heresy. The South Holland synod thus took charge of the Pennsylvania churches, and not the classis of Amsterdam in the North Holland synod, as was done with the churches of New York. Up to 1753 tlie classis of Amsterdam and the South Holland synod worked independently of each other. But the latter became the great guardian of the Pennsylvania churches, althongh the classis of Amster- dam was always a most liberal contributor. 140 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. This visit of Weiss aud Reiff to Hollaud caused a «rrcat deal of interest. Money soon began to flow in. The Dutch were a very liberal people for a religious cause, and espec- ially so for their suffering Reformed brethren. "Was there a Reformed congregation in any part of the world, in Hun- gary, Poland, Russia, Italy, the Palatinate or the East Indies, they quickly responded to aid it. They had about a hundred churches on their list of needy churches. They were the great missionary society, both home and foreign, of the 1 7th century, when the missions of the English speaking Churches were yet unknown. And this liberality they kept up in the 18th century. The particular fact that seems to have so deeply impressed these Hollanders was the statement that there were in Pennsylvania no less than 30,000 baptized Reformed (of wliom 15,000 were members), for whose care there were only two ministers, one of them, Boehm,bciug illiterate, the other, Weiss, being away in Europe. This disproportion the Dutch felt would never do. There must be help given to them. The truth of the matter was that these figures were an overstatement of the number of Reformed in Pennsylvania.* But there * Reiff, upon whose statements little reliability can be placed, even put the number much higher, up to 70,000. When the Reformed in Pennsylvania afterwards heard of these figures they were astonished. A letter from Penn- sylvania, November 23, 1731, says there were only 3,000. Rieger and Diomer (1733) pat the whole number of Germans, which included Lutherans and the sects, at 15,000. Finally when Schlatter arrived in 1740, he put the number of Reformed at 12,000, and later, in 1752, makes it 30,000, but that was thirty years after this, during which time the Oerman emigration to Pennsylvania had been very large. JOUENEY OF WEISS AND REIFF TO EUROPE. 141 is uo question about it, they produced the desired effect, as money came iu rapidly. The movements of Weiss and Reiff in Holland as they went about collecting money, can be to some extent traced. The North Holland Synod reported that the South Hol- land synod had received a letter asking aid for the Penn- sylvania Reformed. They received this news gladly, and ordered collections for it in the classes. On August 15, 1730, Weiss and Reilf appeared before the deputies. He showed his diplomas from Heidelberg, and gave informa- tion about the deplorable condition of the Reformed in Pennsylvania. On September 4 Weiss and Reiif were in Amsterdam, and appeared before the classis of Amster- dam, asking for aid for the Philadelphia congregation. The letter of the Skippack congregation protesting against Boehm's ordination, and asking classis to nullify it, was also read at the meeting at which Weiss appeared. Classis decided that Boehm's ordination must stand, but gave Weiss permission to collect money for his congregations. Classis (December 5, 1730) reports the following gifts to Weiss. (Amsterdam has always been very liberal to the Pennsyl- vania churches.) Its diaconate then gave 240 dollars, its consistory 60 dollars, and the burgomaster had given the privilege (October 18) to Weiss and Reiff to individually solicit subscriptions up to 240 dollars in Amsterdam. As uo begging was allowed in Holland by law, he appointed a resident of Amsterdam, John Peter Bolthuy- 142 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. sen, to accompany tlicm. This permission is such an interesting document that we give it in full : " The burgomasters and magistrates of the city of Ams- terdam, upon the report made to their honors by George Michael Weiss, minister, a^d Jacob Reiif, elder, as com- missioners of the Reformed congregation at Philadelphia, concerning the wretched condition of said congregation, consisting in general of poor and needy people, who were comjDclled by religious persecution or from lack of subsis- tence to depart thither, and after long and expensive jour- neys had to settle there empty handed ; and being without places and opportunities for the exercise of their religion, and for the propagation of the Christian Reformed religion, have' resolved, in order to so far come to the aid of these same poor banished brethren in the faith in the attainment of their desires, to grant and permit to their aforesaid com- missioners, being assisted by John Peter Bolthuysen, resi- dent of this city, that these same within this city and juris- diction of the same, may go about to the houses of the good citizens and residents, and may solicit of the same most ami- cably their Christian compassionate donations and gifts, may be willing finally further to communicate these to them, as also receive these donations and gifts with gratitude, to the amount of six hundred gulden ($240) without more. Done in Amsterdam, October 18, 1730. By ordinance of their honors aforesaid. S. B. Elias. Weiss still continued his work for the Pennsylvania churches. The Classis of the Hague on November G reports the receipt of a Latin letter from Weiss asking aid. On March 16 of the next year A\'eiss and Reiff again JOURNEY OF WEISS AND RETFF TO EUROrE. 143 appeared before the deputies at Delft, and reported that there were four churches with 1 5,000 Reformed in Penn- sylvania. But Weiss did not stay long in Europe. He Avas in Holland only perhaps ten mouths. He must have left in the late spring or early summer of 1731. We know this, because the classis in a letter of October 19, 1731, chides him for not having written to Holland, He must have left Holland at least four months before that time, so as to get to America and then have a letter go back to Holland. He probably left soon after his appearance before the dep- uties, March 16, when the season for navigation again opened. He returned to Philadelphia by way of Mary- land, but did not remain there long. Perhaps coming events cast their shadows before, and he foresaw the future troubles with Reiff about the money, and so left for New York state, where there were large colonies of Germans. CHAPTER III.— SECTION VI. WEISS' LABORS IN NEW YORK. The emigration of the Palatines to New York state in 1710, which has been previously given, formed the nucleus of quite a colony of Germans there. They were located mainly in three groups. The first was along the Hudson, the second was in the Schoharie Valley, and the third in the Mohawk Valley, as at Palatine Bridge and Stone Arabia. So that there was quite a large number of Ger- mans, with no Reformed minister to attend to their wants. It is true. Rev. John Frederick Haeger went with them in 1710, but he went as an Episcopalian, not as a Re- formed. Still he is of some interest to us, as he was orig- inally Reformed. He was born in 1684 at Siegen, and was the third son of Prof. Henry Haeger, who had been the third teacher in the Latin school at Siegen since September 25, 1678. His father afterwards, on June 13, 1703, took the pastorate at Oberfischbach, M'hic-h place he left in 1711 to come to America, settling in Virginia. John Frederick, his son, who went to New York state, entered Ilerborn University, July 5, 1703. On September 28, 1705, Abraham Puuge- ler, professor of philosophy, gave him a certificate that he WEI.SS' LABORS IN NEW YORK. 145 was a diligent student, wlio with all the earnestness of youth entered heartily into the study of the Cartesian philosophy. Haeger closed his course at Kerborn by a disputation on " The Immortality of the Soul." He then went to the little university of Lingen in Germany, but near Holland. His certificate of dismissal shows that he left there, November 14, 1707. On February 14, 1708, he was extunined by the consistory of Siegen and preached his trial sermon on 2 Timothy 3 : 15, 16. He was then licensed to preach, but was not yet ordained. AVe next find him at London, in the Palatinate emigra- tion of 1709. The Society for the Propagation of the Gos- pel in Foreign Parts (the oldest missionary society of the Episcopal Church of England, having been founded 1701) began as early in this emigration as May 20, 1709, to consider the advisability of sending a minister with the German emigrants to the new world. They laid the mat- ter before the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Bishop of London, who approved it. They then began to consider the advisability of writing to Professor Franke, of Halle, for a yoimg German whom they coidd send to America. But on December 16 the secretary of the society re- ]K)i'tcd that that was not necessary, as they had found a young licentiate, John Frederick Haeger, of Siegen, who had offered his services, and he recommended his ordina- tion. So Haeger was ordained, December 20, 1709, by the Bishop of Londou, when he preached his trial sermon 10 146 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. on Matthew 11: 5, " The poor have the gospel preached unto them." The society decided his salary should be 50 pounds, and accepted him. He left Portsmouth early in 1710 with the Palatines. He Avrites his first letter from America to the society, July 25, 1710. Ashe had become a thorough Episcopalian by the laying on of the hands of the bishop, he now endeavored in every way to introduce the Episcopalian service among the Germans. It lias hitii- erto been customary to count Haeger as one of the early Reformed. This is not true. He left his simple Reformed worship at Siegen and came to New York a full-fledged Episcopalian. Indeed he did everything possible to win the Reformed from their faith to the Episcopalian. He was greatly disappointed at his ultimate want of success. Unfaithfulness to the Church of his fathers brought no ease, but only labor. First Kocherthal, the lAithoran min- ister, who came over in the same expedition, vigorously opposed his efforts to turn the Lutherans into Episcopali- ans. As the Lutherans turned against his work, the only Germans left among whom he could i)roselyte were the Reformed. And these might fall an easy prey, for he was the only German minister among them, not a Lutheran. In his second report to London on October 28, 1710, lie says he had 600 communicants, and had received 52 into the church after instructing them in the English catechism. But after that the number of his comniunicants grows smaller. This was partly owing to the emigration of many WEISS' LABORS IN NEW YORK. 147 of the Germans westward to Schoharie, but also to his want of success in drawiu"; them from their Reformed faith. Thus in 1715 he reports 210 families and 458 communi- cants in eiglit places east and west of the Hudson. Nearly a hundred of his communicants went to Schoharie, and the next year he reports only 233 communicants. In liis efforts to make them Episcopalian he reports to the society that as they had no decent place for worship, he had not insisted on their receiving the communion on their knees (as the Episcopalians do), especially as the Germans have a strong prejudice against such kneeling, which reminded them of the Catholic customs in their country. He himself was often compelled to borrow money, as the Palatines were not able to pay him, and he did not always succeed in getting his salary from England. In 1717 the society tried to get the state of New York to pay his salary, and later they gave up entirely paying his salary, although at his urgent appeal they gave him 50 pounds in 1721, but he died before receiving it. His widow married Rev. James Ogilvie, the Episcopalian missionary to the Indians. Haeger accompanied Col. Nicholson's expedi- tion to Canada in 1712, and not long before his deatli, on November 22, 1720, he presided at the marriage of Conrad Weiser. His place was supplied by Rev. John Jacob Oehl (Elilig or Oel). He too has hitherto been supposed to have been Reformed, but, like Haeger, had been ordained 148 THE GEE5IAN EEFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. in Loudou by the bishop of London. After his arrival in New York he wrote, June 29, 1724, to the society that he had been ordained in 1722, had gone with a coh^ny of Ger- mans to New York in 1722, and since that time he had officiated among them on the Hudson in Haeger's phice, but that since then he had removed to Schoharie. He asked the society to grant him the same salary as they had been giving to Haeger. This was not done, bnt they resolved that if he would send his certificates, so as to corroborate his statement, they would present him with 100 dollars. We do not know whether he did so, but the next year the society sends him 100 dollars for his past services, and on September 30, 1734, he thanks them for tlieir support. He also, like Haeger, labored among the Indians. We thus see that these two persons, who hitherto have been considered Reformed, were Episcopa- lian. This Church would lay hold of these young Ger- mans passing through to America and have them ordained, pledging them a salary, and they Avould come to America to win the Germans to Episco])acy. This was done in the soutli as well as in the nortli, as by Zuberbuelilcr and others. ]5ut with the coming of Weiss, in 1731, a Reformed minister apjwared among them to stem the tide to Episco- pacy. This seems to be the meaning of the providence whicli took him from Pennsylvania to New York state. Oehl was still preaching when Weiss came there, but, it WEISS' LABORS IN NEW YORK. 149 seems, to dwindling audiences, so that he was led to give much time to the Indians. The eifort to gather the Ger- mans into Episcopacy failed, and Weiss came to build the Reformed Church on the ruins of their work. We do not know when he left Philadelphia, but he seem's to have left it in the summer or fall of 1731, not lono- after his arrival. He first found his wav in the c5 •■■■ Schoharie valley to Huutersville, now probably the village of Barton Hill, Schoharie county. He was called to Old Catskill, February 8, 1732, and the contract with him was signed by the two consistories of Catskill and Coxsackie, January 8, 1734. (Catskill at that time was a large charge, extending along the west side of the Hudson, from Coxsackie in the north to West Camp on the south). While at Catskill he was mar- ried on November 25, 1733. He left Catskill in 1736 and went to Burnetsfield (now the township of German Flats). On May 8, 1738, he revisited Skippack, Penn- sylvania. After this visit he expressed a desire to classis to again become pastor at Philadelphia. They reply, January 13, 1739, that they would gladly agree to it, and would put nothing in liis way. He writes, April 25, 1742, that according to the wish of the classis he had made known to the Philadelphia congregation his willingness to serve them, but that up to that time he had not heard from them. He therefore suggests to the classis to urge the congregation to move in the matter. He was willing, but 150 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. Philadelphia was not willing. The Philadelphia congre- gation had been prejudiced against him in the Reiff mat^ ter, and had become too strongly attached to Boehm to agree to it. From Burnetsfield he wrote two letters to the classis, one dated May 10, 1741, and the other July 4, 1741. These letters, although brief, reveal a very inter- esting fact about liis ministry in New York state, namely that he did mission work among the Indians. We give the following abstracts from his letters referring to this. From the letter of May 10, 1741 : "That transmitted the previous year has doubtless safely come to hand : at the first opportunity also I shall communicate to your High Worthinesses a faithful description of the Indians in North America, which I have myself composed from my own experience on having sufficiently observed their ways : even as I have also added a painting both of an Indian man and an Indian woman, in order to give your High Worthinesses a better idea of the same." His letter of July 4, 1741, reads thus : " I take the liberty to report to you in the most obedient maimer that I have had a sufficient o])por- tunity to observe the ways of the Indians ; also I have as much as I could interested myself in them ; and since the Indian language is unkuowu to me, I have employed an interpreter on several occasions and caused the most essen- tial ])arts of our Christian religion to be spoken to them, and have in consequence baptized several of them at their desire. It is to be wondered at that in this country peo- Weiss'- labors in new yoek. 151 pie do uot iu.sist upon the couversiou of the Indians. I know of only one English preacher who has interested himself to a partial degree in the Indians and urges their conversion with all earnestness (the most of the Indians were allowed to run along without instruction, like ani- mals). The French in Canada are of a quite different feeling, as they do much for the Indians, and erect churches and school-houses among them for their conversion. They thus win the affections of the Indians, which serves also as a means, in time of war, of doing great injury to the English, from which much difficulty is to be apprehended at the present time." The classis of Amsterdam, of September 10, 1742, states that it has received a package containing a minia- ture painting of the Indians, both meli and women, and Weiss' book, entitled, "A Description of the Wild Men in North America, as to their persons, properties, nations, languages, names, houses, dress, appearance (mien, aspect), ornaments, marriages, food, drink, household implements, housekeeping, hunting, fishing, fighting, superstitious, political government, besides other remarkable matters," composed from personal experience by George Michael Weiss, y. D. M. ; thus (besides?) the title. This descrip- tion consists (of) 96 pages and one-half, besides the preface, in 8vo, The preface states his reasons for writ- ing the book, and is signed by him at Burnetsfield, Octo- ber 4, 1741. 152 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. The Holland fathers express themselves very much pleased with his description of the Indians. He also refers to the importance of missionary work among the Indians in his letter of April 25, 1742. He became pas- tor at Rhinebeck, September 17, 1742, where he celebrated the communion and received 17 into the Church. He stayed at Rhiuebeck till June 29, 1746. During his min- istry there 115 were added to the membership, and he baptized 120 persons. Weiss remained in New York state up to 1746, when his fear of an Indian war led him to accept the call to Goshenhoppen. Thus AVeiss in New York state aided in laying the foundation of the Reformed Dutch Church, which was composed at the beginning of this century of a large ele- ment of Germans, as much as one-third we have heard it said. He was afterwards succeeded there by some of the ministers who had come to Pennsylvania at first, as Sclmor at Esopus, Rubel at Rhinebeck, and others. Our Dutch brethren ought to lionor Weiss as the founder of their work among the Germans. He saved their Germans from Episcopacy. And as he founded the German Re- formed Church in Philadelphia, so he did in New York state. CHAPTER III.— SECTION VII. THE REIFF ACCOUNTS. This has been one of the most perplexing subjects for the Pennsylvania congregations, the Holland synods and the church historian, to unravel. Fortunately the minutes and correspondence now give a pretty clear idea of the state of affiiirs. The suspicions of Reiflf's integrity began before he returned to America. While he was in Europe the Dutch ministers of New York, on November 2, 1730, wrote to the deputies that they did not have the fullest confidence in Reiif, and suggested that the money in his possession be taken from him. Their fears proved only too true afterwards. Reiif returned to Philadelphia in the autunni of 1732, the year after Weiss returned. But he did not settle his accounts or hand over the money he had collected to the Philadelphia and Skippack congregations. Weiss, before he left Philadelphia, had left a memorandum of the amount in Reitf's hands, stating that he had 2197 gulden.* The congregations were very much disappointed at this delay and still more disappointed when he said he had only 750 gulden to turn over to them, or about one-third * A gulden is worth 40 cents. 154 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. of the amount that Weiss had led them to believe was coming to them. They were still more disappointed when he did not attempt to turn over that amount to them, although the congregations were greatly in need of money. The congregation at Skippack made no attempt to recover the money from him, perhaps because it was dominated by the influence of Reiif, on whose property its church building stood. But not so the Philadelphia congregation. They took up the matter and kept pushing it for years against him. They wrote to Weiss for information, who replied that he had not received any money from Reiif, except what was necessary for his expenses, and that Reiif, before they separated, had more than 2000 gulden. After waiting patiently for a year after his return they went into court, November 23, 1732, stating that he had 2197 gulden, and asking that he be compelled to deliver over the money. They also asked that he be restrained from departing from the colony, as they were suspicious he was preparing to betake himself to Virginia to escape payment. The case seems to have hung for nearly a year, and in September, 1733, Reiif tiled his reply. In it he refuses to pay, as the consistory who made the charges against him is not the same consistory that gave him the authorization, May 19, 1730, to collect funds. He then describes how he came to go to Holland, that it was not his desire or intention to do so, but that he did it at the earnest request THE REIPF ACCOUNTS. 155 of the congregation. He denied that he had received 2032 gulden, 12 stuivers. He said he had received 750 gulden in Holland from Van Asten, and also 76 gulden in Germany ; total, 128 pounds and 18 shillings; that Weiss had suggested to him the idea of putting the money into merchandise, so that something might be realized otf it. But the English custom house at Cowes, on the Isle of Wight, detained his goods, June, 1732, as he passed through, and he was forced to leave them behind, but left 49 pistoles (68 pounds, 12 shillings, Pennsylvania money), to pay the customs and freight. He also says that the suit was brought against him by only a part of those who were interested in the money, namely the congregation at Phil- adelphia, but the congregation at Skippack did not join in with them in the suit. Nothing came of this action against him, except that Reiif was put for a time under 1000 pounds bail not to leave Pennsylvania, which made him very angry. The Philadelphia congregation could prove nothing, because it did not have sufficient witnesses. The only witnesses who could aid them were the Holland churches who gave the money, and Weiss who was a partner in the transac- tion. The first were far away across the Atlantic, and the second had betaken himself to another colony, to New York state. Still the Philadelphia congregation did not give up. They next made the attempt to get Weiss to come from New York state to act as a witness, offering to 1 56 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. bear his expenses. They seut to him, both by letter and by express messenger, but he did not come. He, how- ever, wrot€ to them that Reiff had over 2000 gulden, and that he had advised Reiff against buying merchandise. Diemer also says (1736) that Weiss took an oath and cleared himself that he had realized nothing: but 200 gulden for traveling expenses. They also appealed to the classis of Amsterdam's deputies, in Holland, to aid them, March 4, 1733, and asked of them to forward authentic copies of the amounts given to Reiff and Weiss. This the deputies ordered to be done. But it took a number of years and a good deal of trouble to get all the data for the report, which was not sent over until Ai)ril 21, 1739, when deputy Probsting sent over the amount as 2131 gulden, 12 stuivers, which Reiff had raised in Holland, bssides the money he had collected in Germany amounting to 750 Holland shillings. (When Reiff went to Europe again in 1734, the Philadelphia congregation wrote to the classis of Amsterdam, warning them against any effort of his to collect money, and asking them to have him arrested, so that they might examine him about it.) On April 20, 1734, they try still another plan. As Weiss Avould not obey their summons to come to Pennsyl- vania and act as a witness, they ask the classis of Amster- dam, under whose authority he stood in New York, to order him to come to P(>nnsylvania in order to save the Phila- delphia congregation from disruption. The congregation THE REIFF ACCOUNTS. 157 also apjjealcd to Ba'hm the same year to aid them Avith the classis of New York, as he was in correspoudeiice with it. He did so, but nothing came of it, except that their writing to him about it opened up the way by which he became pastor in Philadelphia. The classis of Amsterdam, how- ever, listened to their appeal, and wrote to Weiss, October 1, 1736, that they would not rest until the 2000 gulden given to Reiff were accounted for, and that if he would have his name free from blame, and if he wished, to pre- vent the cessation of their gifts to him, he would see to it that they were produced. For he wrote to them in a let- ter received by them, on above date, that he had brought the Reiff matters before the court and was j)rosecuting Reiff. Weiss saw therefore that something had to be done about the matter, and he went back to Pennsylvania May 8, 1738, to try to arrange matters.* * The account he then filed was as follows : Receipts according to the col- lection book, 2104 gulden. Expenditures: 1. For the voyage from Philadelphia, 18 pounds. 2. For board in London during one month, together with duty for me and Jacob Reiff, in all 5 pounds, 7 shillings, 6 pence. 3. For passage from London to Rotterdam for each, 15 shillings sterling, 1 penny (?) for the bed and 3 shillings sterling for board. 4. Expenses for half a year's stay in Holland and necessary journeys, 700 gulden. 5. At Rotterdam, shortly before my return to London, Reiff gave me 250 gulden. Of these I paid the passage from Rotterdam to London 15 shillings, 1 penny (?) for bed, 6 shillings for^oard. Passage from London to Maryland, 8 pounds, without refreshments, which I took along. From Maryland to Phila- delphia by land aad by sea, 3 pounds, 12 shillings, 1 pence board in London, 16 shillings. In addition to my labors and trouble, 50 pounds for the year. N. B. — Reiff declares that he paid me for clothing and a few books 110 gulden, 14 stuivers. (When pounds and shillings are mentioned, sterling money is meant.) 158 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. Thus the Philadelphia congregation, Weiss and both the synods of Holland and the classis of Amsterdam took every method known to get the money from RcifF. The deputies appealed to the colonial authorities of Pennsyl- vania, writing to a Mr. Lorang, who turned out to be chief justice Logan. If, however, he could not do any- thing, he was to give authority to Dorsius and Dicmer. Logan wrote back that he had retired from office, and so it was left for Diemer to prosecute. Diemer wrote to the deputies, November 14, 1743, that having received author- ity from them by letter of May 3, 1739, he had gone ahead and caused Reiif to give security, and had already spent 250 gulden in the matter. Diemer also boastsd that he would spend 100 pounds more in order to gain the money. When Dorsius visited Holland in 1743, the deputies asked him what he and Diemer were doing about the matter. He replied that he had more than once urged Diemer to go on, but Diemer did not seem to be in a hurry. The deputies order Dorsius, when he returns to Pennsylvania, to notify Diemer that they would take no notice of any account of his tiiat was not itemized or was not signed by Dorsius as well as himself. This is as far as the matter got until Schlatter came. Reiff refused to settle, and the Philadelphia congregation was powerless to compel him. All efforts on both sides of the water had failed. Tt remained for Schlatter to close the matter in March, 1747, by a compromise by which THE REIFF ACCOUNTS. 159 Reiff paid 100 pistoles. But the baneful influence of the money did not stop with that settlement. It seemed to be Judas money, causing trouble to all who touched it. It was made the basis of a number of charges against Schlat- ter, until he finally turned over the last of the money in 1755, so that the amount was closed up about twenty-five years after it was collected, although the Philadelphia con- gregation received part of it by 1747, fifteen years after its collection. CHAPTER in.— SECTION VIII. JOHN PETER MILLER. John Peter Miller was bom at Alzenborn, near Kai- serslautern in the Palatinate. His father was minister in the district of Kaiserslautern, as Boehm states in his letter, November 12, 1730. He was matriculated at Heidelberg University, December 25, 1725. There he was' a fellow student of Rieo;er, who came over to Pennsylvania a vear after him. When he came into this country, he was only a candidate for the ministry, and hence he could uot have been sent by the Palatinate consistory. The)- would cer- tainly have ordained hiui before sendino; him. He arrived at Philadelphia and took the oath of allegiance, August 29, 1730. He found the Philadelphia congregation without a pastor, as Weiss was in Europe, so he supplied them, agreeing to do so till Weiss returned. He also began preaching to the Reiif party at Skijijiack. Bcchm says in a letter of Novembci- 12, 1730, that Miller told him that he had promised to sui)i)ly the eou- gregations at Philadel|)hia aud Oerniantown till Weiss rctnrued. P>ut to do this rightly he would go to the Pres- byterians, so as to gain ordination. Bnohm tried to pre- vent this, and urged him to apply to the Dutch Keformed JOHN PETER MILLER. 161 ministers of New York, as he had doue, and thus have it done according to tlie order of the Reformed Church, rather than the Presbyterian. Miller replied that such a procedure would be too tedious and formal. He answered Bcehm rather sharply, saying he did not see that it made any diiference if the Presbyterians ordained him. He would like to know who had authorized the classis of Amsterdam to rule over the Church in America. The king of England was higher than -the classis of Amster- dam, he thought. Boehm replied that he was glad to act under the control of the classis, whereat Miller repri- manded liim by saying " that in this land of glorious liberty the people were free to elect their ministers and also to dismiss them. Christians were free and Christ alone was their head." Bcehm was greatly displeased and dis- heartened by Miller's actions, as he failed to bring him under the classis of Amsterdam. Miller persisted in being ordained by the Presbyterians, and applied to their synod of Philadelphia. The synod referred the matter to the Presbytery. The minutes of the Presby- terian synod of September 19, 1730, say that "Mr. John Peter Miller, a Dutch (German) probationer, lately come over, be left to the presbytery of Philadelphia to settle with him in the work of the ministry." Rev. Jedediah Andrews, D. D., pastor of the Presbyterian church at Philadelphia, thus speaks in a letter of October 14, 1730, of Miller's unusual scholarship : " V^e gave him," he 11 162 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S, says, " a question to discuss about sanctification, and he answered it in a whole sheet of paper in a very notable manner. He speaks Latin as well as we speak our native tongue, and so does the other, Mr. Weiss." He was ordained about the close of 1730 by the Presbytery, whose committee, Tennaut, Andrews and Boyd, ordained him. He preached at Skippack, as well as at Philadelphia. We do not know why he left Philadelphia, but he went in 1731 to Tulpchocken and took that congregation away from under the care of Boehm, who was able to supply it only once or twice a year with preaching and the Lord's Supper on account of its great distance. There Miller labored faithfully for four years, and his congregations were prosperous. But Conrad Beissel, the head of the Seventh Day Dunkards at Ephrata, had determined to proselyte one of the new Reformed ministers if he could. When he heard of the arrival of Miller and Rieger he said " he thought his work would be better carried out if God had provided one of these young preachers for him, for which also he often bowed the knee before God." lie first tried to gain Rieger, but when he heard that lliegor had married (marriage was contrary to the ruk^s of his cloister at Ephrata) he broke out into the exclamation : " O Ijord, Thou sufferest them to spoil on my very hands." Beissel then turned his attention to Miller at Tul- pehocken. He visited Miller at TulpeliockcM in 17.'>5, who with his elders received him according to his dignity JOHN PETER MILLER. 163 as a man of God. He was accompanied on his retnrn to Ephrata six miles over the country by Miller and Conrad Weiser, the prominent elder of the Lutheran congregation at Tulpehocken. Miller was impressed and later converted to their faith. In the spring of 1735 Miller, together with Conrad Weiser and three elders, besides a number of others (ten heads of families) were baptized by immersion in the new faith. Boehm says that "on a certain day Miller, Weiser and others assembled at the house of Godfried Fidler, and after having collected the Heidelberg Catechism (which he said was man's work, not God's), Luther's Catechism, the psalter and time-honored books of devotion, burned them." The conversion of Miller to the Seventh Day Dunkard faith produced a great sensation among the German colonists, who were divided into many sects and parties. Most of the converts, however, did not remain in the new faith. Boehm says only two men, one of whom Avas Miller, and one woman remained with the community at Ephrata. Weiser soon after returned to the Lutheran faith, and Rev. Mr. Muhlenberg, the organizer of the Lutheran Church in Pennsylvania, married his daughter. Miller took a new name at Ephrata and was known as Brother Jabez, and called himself Peter the Hermit. Beissel proposed to place him in his former charge at Tul- pehocken as a missionary to proselyte among the Germans there, but Miller refused and made application to be 164 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. received iuto Ephrata, which was granted. He lived 61 years in that society until he died, September 25, 1796. By the time he died he had been greatly disappointed at the failure of his sect. He was a spiritually-minded man, very intelligent, but mystical and ascetic. He was mainly known as a scholar, and after the declaration of indejien- dence he translated it into seven languages. He trans- lated it into German in 1778 so as to be read in the various congregations, as this was ordered by congress. The literary activity of Ephrata, which Miller greatly promoted, was very great during the last century, and its publications are now very valuable. Thus they published a Martyr Book, translated from the Dutch iuto German by Miller, the largest book published in America before the Revolution. There is a beautiful story of forgiveness told of INIiller during the Revolution. There lived in Ephrata a man who distinguished himself for his base conduct towards Miller's Society, who was also known as a traitor to the American cause. Charged with treason, he was condemned to death. No sooner was the sentence jironounced than Miller set out on foot to visit General AVashington so as to intercede for the man's life. But he was told his prayer would not be granted for his unfortunate friend. "My friend," exclaimed Miller, " J have not a worse enemy living than this man." " AVIiat !" rejoined Washington, "you have walked sixty miles to save the life of your JOHN PETER MILLER. 165 enemy? That in my jiulgment puts matters in a different light. I will grant you his pardon." The pardon was made out and without a moment's delay Miller proceeded on foot to the place, fifteen miles distant, where the execu- tion was to take place on the afternoon of the same day. He arrived just as the man was conducted to the scaffold, who, seeing Miller in the crowd, remarked, " There is old Peter Miller, who has walked all the way from Ephrata to have his revenge gratified to-day by seeing me hung." These words had scarcely been spoken when he was made acquainted with the very different object of Miller's visit, namely that his life was spared. CHAPTER III.— SECTION IX. REV. JOHN BARTHOLOMEW RIEGER. John Bartholomew Rieger was fromOberingelheim in the Palatinate. He was the son of John Adam Rieger, and the church records at Oberino-elheim sav he was born on January 23, 1707.* He studied at Heidelberg, where he matriculated February 14, 1724, as a student of phil- osophy. He was not a fellow student of Weiss, as has been suggested, for the latter matriculated there six years before. Nor was he a fellow student of John Peter Mil- ler, who came to the university the next year, December 29, 1725, for by that time Rieger had gone to the Uni- versity of Basle, where he matriculated, April 20, 1724. Why he left Heidelberg and matriculated at Basle two months after he entered Heidelberg w^edonot know. He arrived at Philadelphia on the ship Brittaunia from Rot- terdam, and took the oath of allegiance, September 21, 1731. He did not come over with Weiss, as has been suggested, for Weiss came by way of Maryland, he by way of Philadelphia. He was at ouce accepted as a minister by the Reformed congregation at Philadelphia, and became their pastor * His tombstune at Lancaster sajs January 10. REV. JOHN BARTHOLOMEW RIEGER. 167 before November 22, 1731, for on that date he wrote to Holland, signing himself pastor of that congregation. He continued their pastor as late as February 23, 1734, when in a letter to Holland he still signs himself as pastor of the Philadelphia congregation. During 1733 he also sup- plied Skippack and Germantown together with Philadel- phia, preacliing at each place every third Sunday. His pastorate at Germantown was brief, Boehm says. Neither does he seem to have succeeded well at Philadelphia, for he left before April 24, 1734, when Bcehm was called to Philadelphia. After leaving Philadelphia Rieger seems to have gone to Amwell, from which place he writes, February 27, 1735, to Boehm. The congregation at Amwell demanded that he make an apology to Boehm before they would accept him. So in this letter he makes a very hum- ble apology for having held services at Skippack in one of Boehm's congregations without the latter's permis- sion. This apology was made at New York, and signed in the presence of the New York ministers DuBois, Boel and Antonides, and sent to Philadelphia. In that letter he also promises to be subordinate to the classis of Amster- dam, and in doing so he accepted the Canons of Dort, which he afterwards at the second Pennsylvania coetus retused to accept, although he signed it again in 1752. We next find him at Lancaster. Meanwhile his brother, Jacob Frederick Rieger, came to America, September 12, 1734. He settled at Lancaster and became a prominent 168 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. surgeon. The latter was also an agent for the new German Bible published by Saur, the printer at Germantown. He is best known through the duel his son Jacob fought with Captain Chambers, May 12, 1789. He died, January 2, 1762, aged 87 years. He must have been a very much older man than the minister. Perhaps it was the residence of his brother that drew John Bartholomew Rieger to Lancaster. At any rate he became pastor there before 1740. He was at Lancaster duriug the Zinzendorf move- ment, into which he entered very heartily. Perhaps like Lischy, he had become acquainted with the Moravians at Basle, where he had studied. He took Zinzendorf into his house and on the next Sunday preached a sermon, praising the Moravians very greatly. The result was that the majority of the congregation at Lancaster turned against him, especially as Zinzendorf had been guilty of making some extravagant boasts. In the reaction Rieger found his place very uncomfortable there. Having gotten into trouble about the iNIoravians, he concluded the best thing for him to do was to leave the country for a while, until the storm had blown over. So lie went back to Holland to study medicine and thus fol- low in the footsteps of his distinguished elder brother. He matriculated at the University ol" Lcyden, xMai-ch 20, 1744. He registered as from Oberingelhciin, which had been his birthplace. His matriculation has written after his name, "a student of medic^inc and because of poverty admitted gratis." While he was iu Holland he came into REV. JOHN BARTHOLOMEW RIEGER. 169 contact with the classis of Amsterdam. On November 5, 1743, he appeared before the classis of Amsterdam. He was asked by the assembly to give them an account of Pennsylvania where he had spent twelve years. He was thanked for this and given a donation of $10, with a request to answer more fully in writing, which he did, so that classis received a letter, April 13, 1744, giving a description of the condition of the Pennsylvania churches. In it he answers several questions put to him and advises them how to act for their greatest benefit. As the result of this association with the classis he agreed on his return to America to give them fuller information concerning Pennsylvania. On his return to America he shows new zeal for the Reformed Church. He returned to Lancaster, March, 1745, and began the practice of medicine, which he kept up during the remainder of his life. He was, however, somewhat surprised it seems when he came back to Lan- caster, to find that in his absence his place had been taken by another. Rev. Casper Lewis Schnorr, who had come to America in the meantime. The Lancaster congregation had not the greatest confidence in Rieger's adherence to the Reformed ever since lie liad gone off so mucih to the Moravians in the days of Zinzendorf. Wilhelmi says in his report to the deputies of 1735 that Rieger, influenced by the Quakers, had refused to baptize children, and pub- licly taught that one could be saved in any religion of the world. Boehm and Schnorr charge him with some 170 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S, heresy about the sanctificatiou of iufants — that all infants had to pass through a purifying process after death. When Rieger found Schuorr in his place at Lancaster, he sent a letter to Holland signed by a few of his supporters in the congregation. But all his efforts to get back to Lancaster were in vain. Schnorr charges him with hav- ing brought over money from Holland for the church, which he failed to deliver. Rieger declared that was not true, and wrote, November 16, 1745, to Holland about it. The deputies wrote to Schnorr, completely exonerating Rieger of the charge. Rieger reports to Holland that he had tried for six months to organize a coetus or synod, and had written to Boehm and Schnorr, the two Reformed ministers in Pennsylvania, but had not received a reply from them about it. The truth was that Rieger was not the man to be a leader of such an organization. He had proved too unreliable and changeable already, and had thus lost the respect of many of the Reformed. He, how- ever, found a small charge at Schafferstown, near Lancas- ter, where he was preaching when Schlatter came to America. The deputies write to Rieger, June 6, 1746, acquainting him with the fact that Schlatter has been appointed to go to Pennsylvania and organize the Church. They request that he receive Schlatter in love and give him all the assistance possible. They suggest that if he has any accusations to make against Schnorr, as he had suggested, he make them at the first meeting of the coetus soon to be formed. This he does not seem to have done. CHAPTER III.— SECTION X. THE GOETSCHIS— FATHER AND SON.* About the year 1730 there began a new movement of the Swiss emigration to America, just as there had been in 1709. The Graifenried to lead this new movement was John Peter Pury, of Neuchatel. He had been in the English service, although a Swiss, and there learned much about the English colonies. He conceived a plan of colonizing the southern part of Carolina with brave Swiss. Having been director general of the French East India Company, he was therefore somewhat familiar with such settlements. In 1731 he visited Carolina, and arranged matters. The Assembly at London, August 20, 1731, passed an act securing to him a reward of four pounds for every Swiss he would succeed in bringing to Carolina. He and several of his friends advanced the money, he putting the larger part of his fortune into it. He at once began a strong agitation at home. Switzerland now began to be flooded with pamphlets about Carolina. On August 1, 1732, one hundred and seventy Swiss * In this section we enter what has hitherto been a sort of mythical part of our early history, but through the documents that have come to hand it is now clear. 172 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. colonists left England, and arrived at Charleston in No- vember, 1732. The emigration began to gain such power that the Swiss governments tried to suppress it. The can- ton of Zurich published edicts against it again and again, as in 1734, 1735, 1736, 1739, 1741 and 1744. Of the party which left Zurich in 1732, Salomon Hess, one of the leading pastors of the city, says , " There is no good reason at that time for them to leave their fatherland, but they are seized by an insane idea to go to x^merica. Many of them were in good circumstances, and might have remained comfortably at home. A few may have felt oppressed by poverty, but work was plenty. The whole movement must be characterized as a piece of folly."* Berne also changed its tactics. It had origi- nally been favorable to emigration to America, when it sent out Michel at the beginning of the century, but in 1736 it issued an edict against it, and also another in 1742. As the result of the latter edict Grindelwald was arrested and put to dcatli for trying to go. The Swiss cantons tried in every way to discourage the movement. In 1734 the cantons of Zurich, Berne, Basle, Schaffhausen and St. Gall endorsed a booklet called " News and Notices of Things in Carolina," which showed the many dangers of emigration. This pamphlet is interesting to the Re- formed of Pennsylvania, because it has in it a part of a * Quoted by Dubbs in his History of the Oeriuan Refonuetl Church, page 26 H. THE GOETSCHIS FATHER AND SON. 173 letter of Guldin of 1734, in which he speaks of the ter- rible heat in Pennsylvania in summer, so that it was no uncommon thing, nay, rather, it was expected, that if men walked out in the summer's sun they would drop dead on the streets. The government tried to frighten the people into remaining in Switzerland by showing them the dan- gers from sea robbers, from change of climate, from sick- ness after their arrival and from the virtual slavery to the sea captains in order to pay their sea passage. Finally in 1754 a booklet appeared describing an awful shipwreck of a large ship, which had sailed from Rotterdam and had gone down near Philadelphia, drowning 468 persons. Still, in spite of all the edicts and warnings, the emigra- tion continued. One of tliese colonies was led by Rev. Maurice Goet- schi, who had been a minister of the canton of Zurich. He was born in 168G, and became a minister in 1710. He was quite a scholar, especially in Oriental languages, so that he made use of them in his daily lessons at home in his family. He was at first assistant at Bernegg, then (1720) pastor at Salez, where he was deposed in 1731. Still he seems to have retained a great deal of influence there and in the canton, for three years later he is influential enough to lead quite a large colony of Swiss to the new world. He boasted tliat he would be superintendent of all the German churches in the West Indies.* * Of this trip we have three accounts, one given by Louis Weber in his pamphlet, "The Limping Messenger." lie went with Qoetschi as far as 174 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. Goetschi's party left Zurich, October 4, 1734. Loher says the entire party numbered 400. At Basle they had to wait a week so as to get passes through to Rotterdam. As France and Austria were at war, it was quite danger- ous to go down the Rhine. So, as they could not get a pass tlirough the Austrians, they had to get one through the French by way of Strassburg. The people of Basle were, however, very kind to them, and the city of Basle kindly paid $17.60 for their pass. They then, 194 in num- ber, took ship down the Rhine. They had to sail very carefully, concealing their fires at night, because the French soldiers were encamped on the west side of the Rhine and the Austrians on the east side. They were fearfully crowded in the boat, so that they could not lie down, yes, were hardly able to sit. They were not able, therefore, to cook. There was much rain and damp weather, but the only place to dry themselves was in the open air. There was, therefore, much suflering, the children were crying and women lamenting. Many would have returned to Switzerland, but could not, as both sides of the Rhine were lined with hostile armies. At Old Brysach they were searched and all their ciicsts opened. As Goetschi went to the commander of the fortress, the latter warned him to depart immediately, as he saw the French were Rotterdam, and then disgusted turned back to Switzerland again, and after- ward wrote this book which is quite severe on Goetschi. The second is a letter by Goetschi, and the third is by his son John llonry after he arrived in America. THE GOETSCHIS — FATHER AND SON. 175 training their guns to shoot at them. Goetschi says they almost fell over each other to get back to the boat so as to depart. At Ketsch, west of Heidelberg, the Austrian army held them up and treated them very roughly. They were required by them to get a new passport. So John Conrad Wirtz, who took upon himself the name of commissary, went to Heidelberg to their commander, the Dukeof Wur- temberg, and paid him $12.40 for the pass. Thus they now had passes from both the French and the Austrians. Nevertheless they had to suffer much at the hands of the Austrian hussars, who made them pay two dollars a ship. These rode along the shore following them for three hours. They took the meat, says Weber, from Goetschi's dish, and when he complained, they drew their swords around his head, so that he clean lost his appetite. They forced money out of many of the travelers, sometimes even the last that they had. Finally the colonists arrived safely at Mayence, where they stayed four days until terms could be made with another captain to take them to Holland. They paid in all $2.80 for passage from Zurich to Rotter- dam for adults. After leaving Mayence they were more comfortable, as the ship was not so crowded. The ship's people too were more religious, and begged them to pray for a good passage. Henry Scheuchzer read prayers for them morn- ing and evening. Goetschi preached once and b^ it he 176 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. raised a storm. He had before appointed four marriage officials for his party. In his seroiou he compared their actions to the rebellion of Korah, Dathan and Abiram. For this quite a strife arose between him and them, but all was finally healed over by Wirtz. At Neuwied four couples went ashore to be married, among them Wirtz, who married Goetschi's daughter Anna. The Count of Neuwied tried to retain them there, l>ut he could not, as they were bent on going to Carolina. From Neuwied they went to Culenborg, ten hours from Rotterdam. There they had to remain four days because of the strong wind. Goetschi preached there in tlie large church to a congrega- tion, he says, of a thousand. The citizens were exceeding- ly kind, giving them meat, potatoes, beer and forty cents to each. During this stay Goetschi and his family were the guests of the most prominent citizen of the town. Goetschi now sent three men to Rotterdam, telling them tliat they would find there two English ships wait- ing for them to take them to Carolina, and that every arrangement had been made for them to spend the winter in England (none of which was true). The men came back, bringing the news that they could find no English ship. Then all the colonists became very greatly fright- ened. Goetschi said he could not help them. The owner of the ship made them go oif it, as he wanted to return to Mayence. So each took his bundle out of the ship to seek his own fortune. Goetschi hastened away, saying he had THE GOETSCHIS — FATHER AND SON. 177 received a letter from Schobinger, of St, Gall, urging him to hasten to tlie Hague. He immediately went there, tak- ing Wirtz with him, but leaving his wife and children behind at Rotterdam. The colonists remained at Rotter- dam, wandering around, not knowing where to go, and almost starving. They suffered much from cold and hun- ger. Sickness too began to appear among them, and two died. If it had not been for the kindness of some of the citizens of Rotterdam, led by Rev. Mr. Wilhelmi, one of the Dutch pastors there, they would have suffered much more. Meanwhile Goctschi at the Hague had remarkable luck. He had left Switzerland under the delusion that England would send them to the Carolinas. When he arrived at the Hague he called on the British ambassador, Count Walpole, asking that he and his party be taken to England. The Count replied that no one was taken at the royal expense without an express order. Goetschi therefore addressed himself to Mr. Felss, a statesman (whom lie calls antistes), and had a long interview with him. As Goetschi was leaving, Felss said : " For six years we have been seeking a man to organize the churches in Pennsylvania, where the Re- formed number 60,000, of whom 20,000 were not yet baptized. Divine providence has sent you to us. I shall have a call made out for you, by which you shall be superintendent-general over the whole state of Pennsyl- vania, which has eight towns and more than 600 boroughs 12 178 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. and villages. You will have an income of 2000 gulden a year till the organization is completed. I shall see that your people get support from the government. But first a letter must be sent to your government to find out whether you have the requisite testimonials, and you must be examined by our General Synod." Goetschi in his account of this evidently has an exaggerated idea of his field and also of his salary. The states of Holland never promised him 2000 gulden a year, only 2000 gulden the first year. While the negotiations were going on, Goetschi wrote to Rev. J. Baptiste Ott at Zurich for testimonials. Ott wrote to Wilhelmi that Goetschi had gone away against the advice of the Swiss people. Still, as he had gotten as far as Holland, he gave him a letter of introduc- tion to Wilhelmi. Wilhelmi in reply wrote to Ott that Goetschi had arrived with 400 emigrants in midwinter; that while Goetsclii went to the Hague to secure passage, he undertook to care for the Swiss who were suffering from hunger and cold, and he provided for their necessi- ties, being aided by two citizens who fed them all the time at their own expense. Wilhelmi asks the Swiss to give Goetsciii a testimonial, and also asks what was Goetschi's ecclesiastical standing, as a rumor had come that he had been deposed. He also says the day appointed for Goetschi to sail was February 1. Ott replied (but if they sailed on that date, they were off before the letter arrived \ February 5, 1735, acknowledging that Goetschi had beeq THE GOETSCHIS — FATHER AND SON. 179 deposed for immorality. But his great energy and ambi- tion led him to continue hoping for better things. He was therefore led to lay plans for a colony to Carolina. Ott puts the best face on the matter that he can, so as to aid Goetschi. He compares him to repentant Onesimus of the New Testament, and hopes a better future for him in the new world, among new surroundings, as he was a man of ability. Meanwhile it seems from the account of Weber that there was danger lest Goetschi's colonists might make trouble against him in Holland and spoil the arrangement about to be consummated by Goetschi with the state. We do not know how much of Weber's story is to be readily believed, for he is very bitterly prejudiced against Goetschi, but he says that while the Swiss were at Rot- terdam they became so poor and so disgusted with Goetschi's continued deceptions of them that they went to Wilhelmi, who suggested that they go to Felss at the Hague. So they sent three men to the Hague, where Goetschi was, to complain against him. Now if this dissatisfac- tion had reached the ears of the Holland government, Goetschi's plans might have been overturned. He, how- ever, was adroit enough to frustrate them. Before going to Felss, the three men first went to Goetschi, and told him of their intention, at which he was greatly displeased. He, however, told them that Felss knew all about the matter, and that they did not need to go to him. Mean- 180 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. while he kept them to dinner, inviting to it a Mr. Schob- inger, who had been very active for Goetschi's cause at the Hague, and also a Zollikofer, of St. Gall, as well as Wirtz, his son-in-law. After eating, Goetschi said he would give them a letter to Wilhelmi at Rotterdam. They waited for an hour for him to bring the letter. After the hour was past he came and told them that he had sent it by his own son. He thus kept them busy till too late to see Felss, so they went back to Rotterdam without having accomplished their object. Soon after Goetschi came and told them that he had been appointed to Pennsylvania, and they must go with him. They agreed to it, and thus the whole colony was diverted from Carolina, whither they started, to Pennsylvania. Weber says they left Rotterdam, February 24, 1735. Wilhelmi says they were to leave in February. They were twenty-four hours in sailing to England, and at the end of two days were at the Isle of Wight. There, at Cowes, the captain took on provisions, and the emigrants provided themselves with medicines. On the third day out they had a terrible storm and tremendous waves. This they had to bear for twelve weeks. The storms were severe, but they had perils in the ship worse than the storm. Many became sick, because their food was as bad as that of the galley slave, and as for the water, it soon became stale, stinking and wormy. They had for a captain a tyrant, who treated them worse than THE GOETSCHIS — FATHER AND RON. 181 dogs. If any one said he wanted to cook something for the sick, the captain replied : " Get yourself gone, or I will throw you overboard." Finally they saw land, but the wind being unfavorable, they still sailed three days, when a south wind brought them to the mouth of the Delaware. According to the Pennsylvania archives Goetschi arrived on the ship Mercury, William Wilson, master, and its passengers qualified at Philadelphia, May 29, 1735. When they arrived at Philadelphia Goetschi was not well. The care and worry before sailing and the unhealthy conditions on shipboard had made him sick. The day before he arrived, the elders of the Reformed congregation at Philadelphia came on board the vessel to see him. They received him with great joy, when they saw his cer- tificate from Holland. They told him of their church affairs and greeted him as their own pastor. He replied heartily to them, summoning up his strength as if he were well. On the next day they came and took him ashore. But when his feet touched the ground, he was so weak that he could not walk unaided. So they brought him a chair, and in it he was carried to the house where they were to meet him. Many people had gathered there wanting to talk over church affairs with him. But of his own family there were none with him, as his wife and children had remained on the ship. He finally said that all appeared dark before his eyes, and asked that he 182 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. might lie down and sleep. They would not let him sleep in the room on the first floor, as it was noisy there, and all kinds of people were coming and going. They, there- fore, attempted to carry him into a chamber on the second floor. When they were about the middle of the flight of stairs he sat down, folded his hands across his breast, lifted his eyes to heaven and expired. On the third day after, he was buried in the church yard of the principal Presbyterian church in Philadelphia with elaborate cere- monies. The funeral procession was considerable, and contained members of the consistories of the Reformed churches and a great many members. He left a wife and eight children, of whom John Henry, aged seventeen, was the oldest, strangers in a strange land. In their distress young John Henry writes, July 21, 1735, to Rev. Mr. Werdmiller, assistant of St. Peter's church, Zurich, giving the description of the voyage and of his father's death, and asking for aid, which could be sent to Rev. Mr. Wilhelmi at Rotterdam. He also states how he began to preach here. When the people found that he was a student for the ministry, they were delighted when they saw the certificate of his studies, and insisted on his preaching. He was, therefore, the boy preacher of the early Reformed. He says he preached to them every Sunday twice and had catechization twice. The first Sun- day he preached at Philadelphia morning and evening, and after service he had catechization. On the second The goetschis — father and son. 183 Sunday he preached at Skippack (wliere was a very large congregation) in the morning, then liad catechization, and in the afternoon he had service and catechization at Old Goshenhoppen. On the third Sunday he preached at New Goshenhoppen and had catechization in the morning. In the afternoon he preacihed and catechized at Great Swamp, vvheie was a large congregation. He received his certifi- cate from Zurich, May 28, 1786, that he had attended the college there for one year, and they had hopes of his becom- iup; a ffood minister when he had to leave school. He said he was minded to have the Presbyterians ordain him the coming Christmas, so that he could perform all the minis- terial acts as well as preaching. The minutes of the Presbyterian synod, under date of May 27, 1737, have the following notice : "A letter was brought in from Mr. Henricus Goetsch- ius to Mr. Andrews, signifying his desire and the desire of many people of the German nation that he might be ordained by order of the synod to the work of the minis- trv, upon which the said Mr. Goetschius was desired to appear before the synod that they might see his credentials and have some intercourse witli him ; which being done, he produced testimonials from Germany, which were ample and satisfactory to the synod respecting his learning and good Christian conversation, whereupon he was recommended to the care of the presbytery of Philadel- phia, to act upon further trials of him with respect to bis ordination as to them should seem fit." AVhen the matter came up before the presbytery, it 184 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. refused to ordain him, because of bis lack of preparation and of theological knowledge. They advised him to con- tinue his studies. He was, therefore, not ordained by them, but nevertlieless he kept on preaeliing without ordi- nation, and performed the other ministerial duties. On the title page of the church book of Goshenhoppen he says he ministered to the congregations at Skippack, Old and New Goshenhoppen, Great Swamp, Egypt, Maxa- tawny, Moselem, Oley, Berne and Tulpehocken. Boehm says he also preached at Cacusi. Prof. William J. Hinke, who carefully examined the church records, says : " The church record at Egypt has always been supposed to have been opened by Goetschi in 1733, but on closer examina- tion the date turns out to be 1739. Dr. Weiser says that he opened the church record of New Goshenhoppen in 1731, but the title page written by Goetschi has no date, and the first baptism was evidently not written by him, because it is clearly written by a different hand, perhaps by Miller. The only records made by Goetschi there are between 1736 and 1739." This obviates the necessity of a supposition that there were two Goetschis.* Goetschi * That there were not two GoetschiK is shown by the following: 1. The Zurich records know only one John Henry Goetschi. 2. Boehm in all his correi^pondence speaks of only one, and his descriptions tally with this one, namely that he was a young man and preached without ordination. 3. John Henry Goetschi himself never mentions any other Goetschi. This he would certainly have done in his letter to Switzerland, when after the sud- den death of his father he asks for help. There would have been no need of his appealing to Switzerland, if he had had a near relative here in Pennsyl- vania. THE GOETSCHIS — FATHER AND SON. 185 was quite active among his widespread congrega- tions. He opened the church book at Great Swamp, April 24, 1736. Boehm complains of his intrusion into his work in Oley, and speaks of his being there, January 14, 1739. Boehm says that he received the Lord's Sup- per for the first time in America from Rieger at Ger- mantown, and began preaching immediately afterward. This is shoM^n by the certificate of Goetschius which he received from the Germantown congregation in 1744, as follows : " Grace and blessing to the reader. " John Henry Goetschius is a member of our Re- formed congregation at Germantown. Having made a profession of his faith, November, 1736, and having led a consistent life, he has hereby proven himself worthy of participating with us in the Lord's Supper, having evinced this satisfactorily to Rev. Bartholomew Rieger, whom he called at that time to preside at the table of the Lord for our congregation, so that we admitted him to the partici- pation of the Holy Supper with us, which as elders and presiding officers of this congregation we now attest, and in the absence of our former minister have endorsed with our own hand. John Bechtel, Engelbert Sack, John Rush, Paul Geissel. "Done in Germantown, February 19, 1744." Thus, while Beehm endeavored to gather the churches into a unity under the Holland Church, Goetschi set up 186 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. the spirit of independence. He claimed that he had authority for this (as did Reiff and his followers before Goetschi came) in a letter of Wilhelmi written in 1730, and brought over to America, Boehm says, by Weiss. This letter troubled Bcehm very much. It was a long letter. It was addressed to some one at Skippack or Philadelphia. The writer speaks of having received the protest against Boehm's ordination and forwarded it to the classis of Amsterdam, as they had acted on the case. But as they had confirmed Boehm's ordination, he had given it to the committee of the classis of Rotterdam, who had appointed ten commissioners, three from the classis, three from Delft and four deputies of synod, to report to the classis. This letter suggests that each congregation has a right to act for itself, if the classis of Amsterdam will not act, and that Skippack organize a church council to summon all the persons before it who wrote to the classis of Amsterdam in Boehm's favor and succeeded in getting the classis to have him ordained. These men, for deceiving the classis, were to be disciplined, as also Boehm. They were then to make a report of the case and send it to the classis of Amsterdam. This letter goes on to give a regular church constitution for organizing the Reformed churches all over the country into an assembly of twenty- four persons. This assembly should divide the country up into five parishes, each parish to have a church. It then goes on to give regulations for ministers, elders, dea- cons and consistories, over which there should be a high THE GOETSCIIIS — FATHER AND SON. 187 cousistory. The letter then proceeds to show how money could be raised at a shilling apiece to cover all the expenses of the church. It was (juite an elaborate scheme, but it gave the starting of the Church independent of Boehmaud the classis of Holland. It was, therefore, quoted by Ba4mi's enemies as favoring them. His enemies along the Perkiomen could say, we too have some one in Holland who favors us in being independent of you, and that is Hev. Mr. Wilhelnii. They also claimed that they had a church order as well as Boehm. Boehm says that he saw this letter for the first time in 1732, but he could not get hold of it for a number of years. Finally, in 1740, he succeeded and he sent a copy of it to the deputies. He says that he firmly believed the letter was a forged letter for the following reasons : 1. That it was not the original, but a German trans- lation made by Weiss, and therefore had not the authority of an original. 2. That the signature is written by the very hand of the translator, and the name of the translator is not appended. This ought to be different. 3. The letter of six sheets is sewed together and sealed. But the seal is not Wilhelmi's, as he had Wilhelrai's seal on two letters in three forms and none of them were like this. 4. Boehm says when he heard of it he wrote to Wil- helnii, and the latter in a letter, dated June 30, 1736, repu- diated the letter. 188 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. 5. The letter, in its instructions for organization, is almost the same as the report published by the South Hol- land synod. But in their report nothing is mentioned about the liberty of a congregation to be virtually inde- pendent. We might also add that we do not find a reference to this letter in the acts of the deputies or the synod. Boehm was right. The letter was concocted by Reiff and based on the regulations published by the Holland synod, with an introduction composed by himself, so as to give his congregations the right to- independence. But whether forged or not, Goctschi showed it everywhere as his authority over against Boehm. He seems to have still sought for ordination. The South Holland synod, 1738, proposed that he be ordained, and asked whether this could not be done by the Presbyterian synod or some neighboring ministers, or those sent there for that purpose. Goetschi continued preaching till about 1739, when he seems to have given up the work. The South Holland synod of 1 740 says that after having performed all the work of a qualified minister, he had sto2)ped and gone to Bucks county to finish his studies. He there lived half a mile from Dorsius. He studied under Dorsius, and thcji Dorsius, Tennent and Frelinghuysen, the Dutch pastor on the Raritan, ordained him, April, 1741. (B(Bhm says, April 7, 1740, that Goetschi, February 21, 1740, asked Boehm's forgiveness for all he had done against liim, and promised he would live according to church order, but THE GOETSCHIS — FATHER AND SON. 189 on April 20 we find him trying to give the communion to one of Boehm's congregations at Tnlpehocken.) For this act of Dorsius in ordaining Goetschi, the classis of Am- sterdam was very angry, as he had no authority from them to do it, and he was censured. It later proved to be an unfortunate thing. Goetschi even before his ordination left Pennsylvania and went, October, 1740, to Long Island, where the congregations of Newtown, Jamaica, Hempstead and Oesterbay had given him a call. Into his later diffi- culties there we. have not time to enter, as he passes thus out from the German Reformed into the Dutch Reformed Church. Some of his own members refused to recognize him as properly ordained. The coetus of New York, which he joined by going to Long Island, recommended him to the classis of Amsterdam, but they refused to rec- ognize him as a minister, claiming his ordination was irregu- lar. Many of his congregation kept on refusing to recog- nize him. Negotiations dragged along for eight years, and finally he consented in 1748 for the sake of peace to be examined and ordained, although he had been in the min- istry since his ordination for seven years, and since he began it irregularly thirteen years. He afterwards became pastor at Hackensack in New Jersey in 1748, where Muhlenberg met him, and Goetschi gave him much information con- cerning God's kingdom. Goetschi's ministry was blessed with great revivals. He was a man of considerable erudi- tion, a thorough Calvinist, the editor of several books, and one of the first trustees of Queens College, CHAPTER III.— SECTION XI. PETER HENRY DORSIUS.* In 1730 the consistoiy of the Dutch Reformed church in Bucks county wrote to two clergymen in Holland — Knibbe of Leyden and Wilhelmi of Rotterdam — asking for a minister. They sent funds for his traveling expenses to America, and promised to pay him 144 dollars a year. The ministers wrote back, saying they had found a young man who was willing to go to Pennsylvania, but he had not yet finished his studies. They, therefore, asked whether a part of the money sent on for traveling expenses might be appropriated to help him in his studies, in order that he might become their pastor. Tlie congregation granted this. This young man was Peter Henry Dor- sius. We find that he was then at Groningen, having been matriculated there, April 5, 1734. In 1730 he went to Leyden, where he matriculated, Sci)tember 17, 1736, aged 25 years. The record says that he was born at Meurs in Germany. Strange to say, he was a fellow stualth of his wife. It looks, from a letter of Dorsius of January 19, 1747, as if he did not enter as heartily into Schlatter's efforts as he had professed. He says in that letter that Schlatter had no right to make an examination of his con- PETER HENRY DORSIUS. 197 sistory, as it was contrary to his instructions, which said he had to do with the Gei'man congregations, and not with the Dutch. He also says that his congregation is not under the Holland Church, but independent. He says Schlatter would stretch his authority too far, as he himself had done some years before (as inspector), to his injury and loss. He acquaints Schlatter with the fact that the week after his visit his consistory met and utterly refused to allow any examination to be made by Schlatter. He says he will be glad to give an explanation, but he serves notice on Schlatter that his work was among the German churches and not among the Dutch. But although Dorsius says this, January 19, 1747, his consistory. May 2, 1748, went to Philadelphia to confer with Schlatter about their church, but found him away, and ask him to come up, June 2, 1748. They say they trust they are rid of Dorsius, and hope that Schlatter will get them another minister. The truth was that Dorsius was morally in a bad condition. His moral character was breaking down. His consistory appealed to Schlatter to aid them in the trouble with him. Dorsius' wife, Joanna Hoogland, to whom he had been married, December 16, 1740, left him on account of drunkenness. His father-in-law exposed him in the Pennsylvania Ga- zette, June 16, 1748, and his consistory suspended him from the ministry, September 1, 1749. Although the danger of war was great, yet he sailed from Philadelphia for Ireland on August 4, 1748, and 198 THE GERMAN REPORMED CHURCH IN U. S. finally arrived at Rotterdam, October 1, 1748, O. S. He does not appear before the deputies until June 13, 1749. He had been supplying churches at Rotterdam and Maas- lings, and had been asked to become assistant at Issel- stern. He presented to the deputies a summary of his work in Pennsylvania, with suggestions for properly organizing the congregations. He appears again before the deputies, January 20, 1750, asking for a dismission, so that he could accept an appointment by the Dutch West India Company to d' Elmina in West Africa, The depu- ties examined their former acts at the time of his first departure to Pennsylvania, and decided that he had not been appointed by them to go to Philadelphia, but that it was a private arrangement between the Bucks county con- gregation and himself. They therefore answered him that as they did not appoint him to that position, it was not in their power to dismiss him, but that he must look to the congregation for his dismissal. The deputies learned at their meeting of May 27, by a letter of his wife, about his scandalous conduct in Pennsylvania, and they refused to do anything for him. They referred him to the classis of Amsterdam for examination into his case. On January 13, 1750, he had appeared before the classis of Amsterdam, offering to go to d' Elmina under the West India Com- pany, but classis would not allow it to go into effect till he had shown papers of dismissal and appeared before classis. Although they repeatedly appealed to him to PETER HENRY DORSIUS. 199 appear before them, he did not do so. By October 5, 1750, they had learned from the deputies of his conduct in Pennsylvania, which fact the classis communicated to the West India Company. The Holland Church, as well as the coetus, tried to aid Dorsius' wife by gifts of money for many years. The last mention of gifts to her by the coetus is in 1776, up to which time, from 1752, the coetus granted to her $244.70, mainly in amounts from seven to fifteen dol- lars yearly. Thus Dorsius, though the pastor of a Dutch congrega- tion in Pennsylvania, very considerably affected the Ger- man congregations by his oversight, his visitation of some of them, and also by his reports about them to Holland. CHAPTER III.— SECTION XII. THE SYNODS OF THE CONGREGATION OF GOD IN THE SPIRIT. The first great controversy among the Reformed occurred in 1 742. It came at first iu the guise of union, but soon devek^ped into disunion. The Germans of Pennsyl- vania contained among them a great many diverse elements. Besides the churchly element, composed of Lutherans and Reformed, there were many sects, as Dunkards, Mennon- ites, Schwenkfelders and even some converts to Quakerism, besides many mystics, as Inspirationists, the New-born, Labadists, Ronsdorfers, etc. For the Germans as a race are naturally inclined toward religious things. It was out of Germany and German Switzerland that the Reformation was born. This peculiarity became prominent, especially as many of them had come to America for the sake of religious liberty. They were, therefore, a religious people. And as there were so few ministers among them, tliese sects found abundant opportunity to spread their influence unhindered. In 1736 John Adam ({rnber, of Oh'v, the Inspiratiouist, issued a call urging the religious elements to come into some sort of a union. The coming of Wliitcficld into Pennsylvania, although lie preached only in English, CONGREGATION OF GOD IN THE SPIRIT. 201 yet stimulated the religious life of tlie Germans very much, lu 1740 he preached at the house of Henry Antes at Falk- uer Swamp, where Bishop Bohler, the Moravian, preached the same afternoon in German. Henry Antes is an interesting religious character. He was born at Freinsheim in Khenish Bavaria in 1701. He was a leading man in the business life of the community, especially in the making of wills and the settling of estates, because every one had confidence in liis integrity and judg- ment. And he was also a leader in the church in that district, '^ the pious Reformed elder of Falkner Swamp," as he was called. He seconded the appeal of Gruber, and when Whitefield came, he gave him a hearty welcome. Even before Whitefield's arrival in Pennsylvania, the Mo- ravians had begun to evangelize there. Bishop Spangen- berg visited it in 1736, spending some time at Skippack, where Antes became acquainted with him. All these events prepared Antes for the part he took in the Congre- gation of God in the Spirit, and later in the Moravian Church. Such was the condition of the Germans at the begin- ning of the fourth decade of the last century. The various elements among them had been religiously stimulated and were ready for only a spark to ignite them. "^I'lie coming of Count Ziuzendorf, the head of the Moravian Church,* * The Moravian Church in the last century was in EuDpe a f-plendid wit- ness for the truth against the tide of rationali-'iu that went over (ierm^ny; ^ but on the other hand she was charged with trying to proselyte among the different denominations. 202 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH JN U. S. brought matters to a crisis. Zinzcndorf says he found the Germans in Pennsylvania a perfect Babel. He under- took to gather them into the Moravians under the idea of tropes (with which the Moravians were very familiar in Europe.) The idea of tropes (circles of believers) was founded on Scripture in Philippians 1 : 18 : " What then? notwithstanding, every way, whether in pretence, or in truth, Christ is preached." The word for " way" in the Greek is " tropos." The idea of tropes meant that mem- bers of other denominations who were earnest Christians could form circles by themselves in their own denomina- tions. But, although they still remained members of the other denominations, these tropes would be connected ^^■ith the Moravian Church and thus under their control, and really a part of their Church. The IVIoravians had churches of this kind at various ]>laces in Europe, as Geneva and Basle, where circles of Moravians were still members of the Reformed Church. Zinzendorf planned to do in America what had been done by them in Europe. He aimed at a union denomi- nation, in which there would be a Reformed trope or circle composed of the Reformed members in the union, and a Lutheran trope composed of the Lutherans, etc., but all these tropes being under the control of the Moravian Church. He could the more easily introduce these tropes among the Reformed, because they, especially along the northern Rhine, were accustomed to " ecclesiola in ecclesia," CONGREGATION OF GOD IN THE SPIRIT. 203 (a little church within the church), composed of the spirit- ually-minded, who would hold prayer meetings for spiritual edification. Zinzeudorf could still more easily carry this aiovemeut into effect, for he himself was a peculiar combi- nation religiously. According to his creed he was a Luth- eran, for he had received the Augsburg Confession, which the Moravians also accepted. (Indeed he claimed to the Lutherans in America to represent the true Lutheranism, the piety of Luther's early life before scholasticism gained control.) Again, he could well represent the Reformed, for had he not been ordained by the head of the Reformed Church of the Electorate of Brandenburg, Jablonsky, who was also a Moravian Bishop ? So he was Lutheran and Reformed, and yet the liead of the Moravian Church. He arrived at Philadelphia in December, 1741, and soon after went up to Oley. At Falkner Swamp he met Henry Antes, who became deeply interested in him, so much so that he accompanied him to the Forks of the Del- aware (Bethlehem) where Zinzendorf was laying out a col- ony for the INIoravians. Antes spoke to him on the subject of church union. It was just the thought that Zinzendorf had uppermost in his mind. And when Antes suggested that a circular be sent out, such as had been sent out by Gruber in 1736, Zinzendorf told him to go ahead and issue it ; the sooner, the better. Antes, therefore, issued his cir- cular, December 15, 1741, 0. S., calling for a meeting of all who desired union. It said that they were to meet " not for 204 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. the purpose of disputing, but in order to treat peaceably concerning the most important articles of faith, and to ascertain ho^v far we might agree on most essential points for the purpose of promoting mutual love and forbearance." The circular called for a meeting at Germantown on January 1, O. S. For Zinzendorf had already gained great influence at Germantown. The pastor of the Reformed church there, at that time, was John Bechtel. He was born October 3, 1690, at Weinheim, in the Palatinate. His mother died when he was nine years old and his father when he was fourteen. Then he learned the trade of turner at Heidelberg. After serving his time at the trade, in 1709 he traveled, as the German apprentices are accustomed to do, to further learn at their trades. He said that he was wild and frivolous for three years, but then came under the influences of tl\c Holy Spirit and became deeply peni- tent for his sins. In 1714 he started at his trade at Heidelberg, married the next year, and in 1717 he moved to Frankenthal. In 1720 lie, with his family of a wife and three daughters, came to America, and settled at Ger- mantown. He found a Reformed congregation there without a jiastor. Tlie Swedisli I>utheran minister, Dylander, in tlic absence of a pastor for it, had hiid its corner-stsone in 1719; and in 1725 the church had a bell, which was a sign tliat its members had some means. The Pennsylvania Historical Magazine (vol- CONGREGATION OF GOD IN THE SPIRIT. 205 lime 1 9), says : " He began holding religions meetings for the Reformed two years after he settled there. At first he held them in his own house, not only on Sunday, but every morning and evening on week days." The congregation in 1733 called him as pastor. A license to preach was sent him from Heidelberg. He was minis- tering to the Reformed when Zinzendorf arrived. His congregation had always inclined to pietism, for it was located in the midst of the sects who first settled Ger- mantown. He himself became early acquainted with the leaders of the Moravians who were in Pennsylvania. In 1738 he met Spangenburg, when he was at Skippack, and Bechtel was in the habit of visiting him every four weeks. So when Zinzendorf arrived, Bechtel was prepared to sym- pathize with his movement. And yet it seems that he underwent a severe struggle before he first met Zinzen- dorf personally. Perhaps he instinctively felt it would ultimately change his whole career, as it did. Jordan says that Bechtel's daughter tells the following incident of her father : " On Zinzendorf 's arrival at New York he wrote to my father to meet him in Philadelphia. Through fear of incurring the displeasure of such of his friends as had been prejudiced against the Count, he hesitated to comply with this request. I urged him to go. I gave him no rest, and as my verbal ])ersuasi()ns were of no avail, I ran to the pasture, caught his riding horse, and had it saddled, bridled and brought to the door. This appeal father 206 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. could not resist, and out of regard for me he rode to town to see the remarkable man, who impressed me so deeply when I saw him the next day at our house, and indelibly so when two weeks later I heard him for the first time pro- claim the words of eternal life." After Bechtel had thus called to see him Zinzendorf came to Germantown, and the next morning after his arrival visited Bechtel. He said to Beclitel that he wanted to see his place of work. Bechtel who was a turner by trade, naturally thought he wanted to see his turner-shop, and did not notice that Zinzendorf referred to his church, in which he had preached many years. At last when he comprehended what Zinzendorf meant, he took him into the church. Zinzendorf asked him how many persons it would hold. Bechtel replied, " about a thousand." Zin- zendorf replied that he saw there was a wide field for work when he returned. Zinzendorf was thus trying to gain influence in Bechtel's field. Twice he told Bechtel that he wanted to be his coufessor or private chaplain. As a result *• Bechtel became infatuated with him and tlirew open his church to him. Zinzendorf preached a course of sermons there on 1 Timothy 3 : 16, beginning the first of the year, 1742. Thus Germantown was being prepared to receive the first of the synods of the Congregation of God in the Spirit. CONGREGATION OF GOD IN THE SPIRIT. 207 The First Conference, January 1 and 2, 0. 8. The first conference met at Germautown, at the house of Theobald Endt.* The circuhir of Antes said that it was believed there would be a large assembly, but hoped that that fact would not keep any one away. It was attended by quite a number of persons who came, some expecting great results from the movement, others out of curiosity. Most of the various German denominations were represented, Lutherans, Reformed, Mennonites, Dunkards, Schwenk- felders, Moravians, Mystics and Separatists. Of these the only ones who had been regularly appointed to represent their denomination were the four delegates from the Sev- enth-day Dunkards of Ephrata.f The rest came merely in their individual capacity and did not represent their denominations, as they had not been appointed by them. In this conference the Reformed were represented by Antes, Bechtel and others. Altogether more than eight denominations were represented, and there were thirty-six members. Among the number was one Reformed minister. Rev. Samuel Guldin, who attended the first session. But although it was intended to be a conference on union, very soon dissimilar elements came to the surface. It seems that Conrad Matthai, one of the Mystics along the Wissahickon, together with a tailor named Schierwagon, * It was situated next to Bechtel's house on the west side of Main street, near Queen Lane. f A sect who believed in immersion and celibacy, and kept Saturday as, Sunday. 208 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. criticised Zinzendorf's public teaching in a paper which they presented. Zinzendorf replied severely, which fright- ened them. The Seventh-day Duukards seconded Zinzen- dorf, and as Zinzendorf reproved him, there was a consid- erable disturbance, and some saw that he was acting as the judge as well as defendant in the matter under discussion. The result was that many good people went away from the first session, saddened at the Avant of harmony, and did not come again. He also became involved in a controversy with a Seventh-day Dunkard. Still the published pro- ceedings of the conference say all was harmony, although Freseuius gives the other side. In spite of difficulties and differences it was determined to hold a second conference at Falkuer Swamp. The minutes of this conference were signed by nine persons (not, however, by the Seventh-day Dunkards present). The Second Conference at Falkner Swamp, Janaary 14- and 15, 0. S. This was held at the house of George Huebner. It was considerably smaller than the first conference at Ger- mantown. From Germantown there came only Bechtel. The Seventh-day Dunkards sent delegates. Soon, how- ever, there appeared a controversy. There was present a former Moravian, Haberrecht, of Georgia, \\\\o had left the Moravians and gone to the Seventh-day Dunkards. He remained with them two years and then returned to the Moravians. The Seveuth-day Dunkards naturally CONGREGATrON OF GOD IN THE SPIRIT. 209 objected to his admission, while the Moravians were favor- able to him. The eontroversy Zinzendorf passed over as a love-strife. ]3ut Haberrecht stayed to the conference. The lot (as was the custom of the Moravians) was constant- ly consulted before anything was done. It was always kept lying on the table. The minutes of the conference Avcre signed by twelve persons, one of them from Amwell, N. J. The conference was declared undenominational. The Third Conference at Oley, February 10—12, 0. S. It was held at the house of John De Turck. This con- ference revealed still further the beginnings of disorganiza- tion in the movement, for the Seventh-day Dunkards were not represented, but sent two letters instead in reference to the subject of marriage, which caused, quite a discussion. They withdrew because by this time they saw that there was no possibility of their gaining Zinzendorfover to their ideas of immersion and celibacy. Still while the movement w^as disintegrating by the loss of some of its varied elements, it was also becoming more compact in its organization of those who remained. Thus it appointed trustees, ordain- ing four, Eschenbach, Ranch, Bunnerand Pyrlaus. There was also a Quaker lady i)resent at this conference who made an address. But the most important event was the baptism of three Indians — the first Indian baptisms in Pennsylvania. (Brainard's work among the Indians in Pennsylvania came later, and his converts were in New Jersey.) 14 210 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. Christian Henry Rauch was one of the most beantiful characters of the Reformed who entered tliis union move- ment. He came over to do missionary work among tlie Indians. When he arrived at New York, July 16, 1740, he accidentally met a missionary from St. Thomas and was introduced by him to friends, from whom he expected help for the heathen among whom he was to work. But, on the contrary, they tried to dissuade him, saying the Indians were a bad set, among whom no European could live in safety. He found that the Indians, Avho happened just then to come to New York on an embassy, were given to intoxication, vet he found them tractable. And receivinsr an invitation to visit them in their town, he went to Sheko- meko, on the borders of Connecticut, east of the Hudson. There he preached to them in Dutch, which they under- stood. He had many difficulties in his work. The Indians were dull to the gospel. The white settlers around plotted against him. But he continued, and by 1 742 he brought with him by way of New York to Oley, three of the IMohican Indians for baptism. The scene must have been impressive. The three Indians were placed in their midst, and witli fervent prayer and supplication devoted to the Lord Jesus Christ as his eternal })roperty. And then Rauch baptized them after the Moravian custom " into the Avounds of Jesus" with the names Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, Then Zinzendorf and the rest laid their hands upon them while a hymn was sung. The scene took place CONGREGATION OF GOD IN THE SPIRIT. 211 in the barn of Mr. De Turck. These three were the first fruits of the work of the Moravians among the Indians. (Before the end of the year twenty-one more were added to the Church.) This conference closed with a love feast. The Fourth Conference at Germantown, March 10 — 12. This conference should have been held at Ephrata, according to a previous arrangement made at the second conference with the Seventh-day Dnnkards, but as they had withdrawn from the movement, it was held at Ger- mantown, at the house of Mr. Ashmead. There was, as usual, a good deal of discussion at this conference, but nothing of vital importance done, except that it was decided to have preaching in Philadelphia Sunday mornings and at Germantown Sunday afternoons. The acts were signed by twelve persons. The Fifth Conference at Germantown, April 6 and Fol- lowing Days. This was opened at the Reformed church and was the most important conference yet held. It still further con- solidated the movement by the adoption and publication for the Reformed of a catechism known as Bechtel's cate- chism. Bechtel read the catechism to them. It was either written by Zinzendorf or at least inspired by him, or perhaps written by both together, but it generally goes by the name of Bechtel's catechism. Its title is : "A Short Catechism for some Congregations of Jesus of the 212 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. Keformed religion in Pennsylvania, who hold to the ancient Synod of Berne : Agreeable to the Doctrines of the Moravian Church. First published in German by John Bechtel, Minister of the Word of God: Philadelphia, 1742." It says it was based on the articles of the Berne synod of 1732, but the authors of those Berne articles would hardly recognize them in the catechism. Their articles were dogmatic, this was practical, emotional, some- times even wandering in its thought. It lacks depth of thought, for it was composed in only four weeks, but it has some unction of spirit. It reflects the high state of experi- mental piety demanded by the Moravians. It consists of 243 questions, and its answers are in many cases Bible quotations. It was first published in German and English. A very interesting translation of Bechtel's catechism is the Swedish. It seems that the Moravians under Zin- zendorf had begun a mission among the Swedes, and two Moravian young men, graduates of the University of Upsala, were ordained to this work. One of their converts was Olaf Melander, who came from Sweden in 1737 with Dy lander as parochial school-teaclier. In 1743, while em- ployed in the printing office of Franklin, he became so much interested in this catechism of Bechtel that lie translated it into Swedisli. It is, therefore, interesting as one of the few Reformed books in the Swedish language, whose relig- ious literature is almost entirely Lutheran, because tlie people are all Lutherans. The publication of the cat poned till March 14, when the deputies from North Hol- land would be present. (This letter of Cruciger said that Schlatter was willing to go and serve Lancaster at the terms they offered in 1744. We thus see that the original idea of Schlatter was to go to Lancaster.) Hardly had the letter been before the deputies (March 1), than lo, Schlat- 'Ui^ ter himself was there at their next meeting (March 15). The deputies examined his testimonials and questioned him. They put all sorts of difficulties in his way, but were greatly pleased with the promptness and heartiness with 'which he answered them. 302 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. The minutes of this meeting ofthe deputies are so inter- esting that we give that part of them which refers to Schlatter : " Rev. Clerk thereupon had examined the ascertained testimonials and motives of the aforesaid Rev. Mr. Schlat- ter and found them all genuine, so that he had caused him to remain here in the Hague until this morning, and now in advance gave favorable explanation ofthe matter besides handing over his testimonials, which were all read and found to be so laudable that the desire was felt to see the person himself, and to hear him speak ; to which end he was summoned before this session and appeared at the time appointed. " He first gave utterance to a precious wish for a bless- ing upon this assembly, which was answered by a counter wish by the president. AMien the president thereupon questioned him about his so far difficult and expensive journey of about two hundred hours in this severe winter season in order to go and labor in the Pennsylvania vine- yard, when he was already actually a minister in his native city of St. Gall, he replied to it that since lie Avas still young, unmarried and inclined to foreign service, he had resolved, upon hearing ofthe lack of ministers in Pennsyl- vania, to go and feed these shepherdless sheep for five or six years, and that being the youngest but one of the twenty- six ministers of St. Gall, lie drew but $20 per year salary, and had the rather taken this choice, because if he were to be still living and wish to return to liis country, he Avould then fall into the place of the ministers which had died in the interim. And St. Gall, having such an abundance THE EARLY LIFE OF SCHLATTER. 303 of ministers and licentiates, could easily be provided with another minister, whereas Pennsylvania had lack of both. " When it was further represented to him that the sal- aries which the congregations in Pennsylvania offered to a pastor were very small, but that four elders and eleven members of the congregation at Canastocka in the city of Lancaster in the year 1744 had offered to a minister who should come over to them, about $96 annually, he was asked whether he would be satisfied with that salary in case the place were still vacant. He answered ' yes.' And when, so as to be perfectly sure, it was added, in case this place might beyond expectation be filled with a minister, whether in that unforseen case he would be willing to accept other combined churches which also desire pastors, but at the most offer only $12 or $24 for salary, with con- sent of the consistories of those congregations, in order to constitute thereby a comfortable salary ; when he was asked if he would first of all make inquiry after the state of the entire Church in Pennsylvania, how many ministers were needed there, and what salary each district would give a ims- tor, and write this to us properly systematized and signed, he answered ^ yes' also to this, but added to it that he hoped the expense of doing such things in Pennsylvania would be refunded to him, which fact was agreed to with him. " When finally it was represented to him that deputies would indeed meet the traveling expenses out of the moneys of synod, but that they had scruples about the expenses of his possibly long stay before a ship would be starting for Pennsylvania, he answered generously that his living expenses would not be much, and that he had supposed that soon there would have been an opportunity to depart. 304 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. But that learning now that it might probably be a long time before that opportunity came, he took this loss of liv- ing expenses on himself. The Rev. Deputies seeing his promptness, heartiness and Christian disinterestedness, combined Avith Christian humility, modesty and friendli- ness, were profoundly rejoiced that they had encountered so worthy and capable a subject, the more so because they understood that he had already at Frankford made arrange- ments for the sending of German Bibles and Catechism books to Pennsylvania. They conceived that through him they could organize the scattered Peunsylvanians, and accepted him provisionally as minister to Pennsylvania with the promise that when he should have obtained his dismissal, or rather his permission for some years from the church of St. Gall, they would later solemnly install him (to the Pennsylvania service), and fortify him with all necessary instructions." The deputies sent five ducats to Heidelberg to Cruciger, asking him to send German Bibles and catechisms. Schlatter after thus appearing before the deputies at the Hague, went to Amsterdam, recommended by the dep- uties, to Revs. Kulenkamp and Schlluymen, two Reformed ministers there. Kulenkamp notified him and the classical commissioners that Lancaster was no longer vacant, as news had come that Schnorr had gone there. While Schlatter was at Amsterdam he learned that a vessel would sail to America, May 29. The Amsterdam consistory was very kind to him, giving him $60, and the deaconate of Amsterdam gave him $120 without his asking for it. (This church at Amsterdam has been proverbially liberal THE EARLY EIFE OF SCHLATTER. 305 to the Pennsylvania churches.) On April 13 Schlatter was at Rotterdam conferring with Rev. Mr. Wilhelmi, who had had so much experience about Pennsylvania affairs, and also negotiating with the Messrs. Hope Brothers, the shippers to America, about his passage. He was at the Hague again, April 25—28, at the meeting of the deputies. They turned over to him all the loose money they happened to have in the treasury, amounting to $242.22. They also gave him his instructions. These were : 1. An introduction to the German Reformed Church of Pennsylvania, giving his reasons for being sent thither. - ly, and was found immediately after, booted and with spurs on, lying on the floor in his room. The bullet passed through the left breast and was found under the shoulder-blade, next to the skin. On his person was the sermon which he had intended to preach at Lancaster two days after. Its subject was " The Divine Call of Samuel." The death of Hochreutiner cast a gloom over the early Reformed Church. Schlatter pays a tribute to him by publishing the sermon found on his person, together with a preface by himself, written November 9, 1748. This sermon was entitled " Hochreutiner's Swan Song." Its text is : 1 Samuel 3, l-2.t It reveals a higher standard of ability than is placed on him by Sheitlin, of St. Gall, » " Memorials of J. J. and G. E. Scherer," St. Gall, 1822. f A copy of it is to be found in the Pennsjlvania Historical Society at Philadelphia. EVENTS BETWEEN 2d AND 3d COETUS. 361 in his book, who says that he went abroad because he had not the ability to sustain himself in his home Church at St. Gall. It is not an extraordinary sermon, but one of good average ability. It reveals that he would probably have made an earnest, faithful and acceptable minister. It seems a strange providence that his life should be so suddenly cut off, when he was so much needed by the shepherdless German Reformed in Pennsylvania. Saur in his paper tells a story of his humility, that he was told before he went to Lancaster that he would find the con- gregation composed of rough and untrained people. He replied : " That is what I want, because I wish I were a woodchopper." After his death, Bartholomaeus (Decem- ber 21,0. S.) offered, out of sympathy with them in their affliction, to supply Lancaster monthly, and said he could begin April 2. There seems to have been some hitch in the arrangement, for Schlatter, on February 1, 1749, says that he had written to Tulpehocken and was disappointed with the congregation. He thought they had a better feel- ing toward Lancaster. His letter is lost, but he probably suggested that Bartholomaeus serve both congregations, which Tulpehocken granted, but kept three-fourths of the time. Lischy also tried to help Lancaster by sending them a call, September 12, 1749, which they should send to Zubli in South Carolina.* * The Lancaster congregation had been supplied with preaching by John HoflFman, who agreed, May 4, 1747, to be school- master, chorister and cate- chist, and when there was no pastor, to read sermons every Sunday. 362 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. On October 16 Boehm installed Bartholomaeus as pas- tor of the Tulpehocken congregation, while Schlatter preached on the same day Hochreutiner's funeral sermon to an audience streaming with many tears. On October 28 two Dutch students for the ministry, David ]\Iarinus and Jonathan DuBois, who had been studying in America, visited him and asked him to assist them in getting per- mission from the synod to present themselves for exami- nation to the coetus, so that they might receive a call to a church and accept it. Schlatter promised to try to fulfil their wishes. On November 3 he received the confession of faith of Lischy, dated from Little Catores, October 29. This is very interesting, because it is the first private creed of a German Reformed minister in America, and also the first American confession accepted by the de})u- ties in Holland.* He had been ordered by the coetus to prepare this confession, so that it might be sent to Hol- land, that the deputies might be able to pass judgment on him whether he was truly Reformed or not, and therefore fit to become a member of the coetus. It reveals Lischy as quite a bright thinker. It is, perhaps, the clearest doc- trinal statement of that period of our Church. It consists of eleven paragraphs on the different doctrines. It states first the doctrine of God, then of the trinity under the three heads of Father, Son and Holy Ghost, and then the * For a published copy of this confession see the Chnsliaji World, Day- ton, 0., December 17, 1898. EVENTS BETWEEN 2d AND 3d COETUS. 363 Holy Catholic Church, justification, sanctification, bap- tism, Lord's Supper, prayer and Scripture, His state- ments of the doctrines of the Moravians (which he repudi- ates) is the clearest we have seen of that period. He shows himself in it in full accord with the doctrines of the Reformed. This confession was sent to Holland, but the deputies did not come to a decision about it until Schlatter came over there in 1751. They decided his ordination should be respected and he be received as a full member of the coetus. He was ever afterward the most devoted friend Schlatter had, and the energy he had shown for the Moravians was now transferred to the Reformed. He exerted quite a decided influence in bringing back many to the Reformed who had gone over to the Congregation of God in the Spirit, as at Donegal and Muddy Creek. In 1749 Lischy published another pamphlet against the Moravians, entitled, " Tlie Warning Voice of the Watch- man," printed at Germantown, a sermon on Matt. 7 : 15-23. But even more important than these events were the last acts and the death of Boehm. There is a letter of Boehm, the last he wrote to Holland before his death, that is exceedingly interesting and very important. It already reveals a divergence between Schlatter and Boehm on some points of cultus and of Church government. He writes to know whether Schlatter's commission as visitor is to con- tinue forever, or whether the whole direction of the Re- formed Church affairs is to be placed under the coetus now, 364 THE GEEMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. instead of Schlatter. That question put into a nutshell the whole future of the Reformed Church for the next seven years. Was the coetus to be regulated by Schlatter or by itself? Boehm thinks the latter would be the best method. If his advice had been followed by the Holland deputies, much of the future trouble would have been avoided. He also asks whether Rieger, who would not accept the creeds of the coetus, could therefore be presi- dent of the coetus the next year, or could be even a mem- ber. Boehm was right here constitutionally. He speaks of his great joy at Lischy's return to the Reformed faith, and also at the arrival of the last three ministers. He also asks the classis whether the letters and donations from Holland had not better be sent to the coetus, rather than to Schlatter, and the president open them in the pres- ence of the coetus, that thereby all trouble about the mon- eys would be avoided. Happy would it have been if the coetus had followed his advice. The future trouble of Schlatter with Weiss and Leydich would have been avoided. He also calls the attention of the classis to the fact that Schlatter used the Church order of St. Gall, instead of that of the Palatinate or the Netherlands, which was the Church order of Holland. He also calls their attention to an irregularity of Schlatter in administering the communion, and also in ordaining and installing elders at Philadelphia. We can not help acknowledging that Boehm in these matters was right and Schlatter wrong. EVENTS BETWEEN 2d AND 3d COETUS. 365 But perhaps the most beautiful and even pathetic part of this letter — his swan song — was his description of the organization of the congregation at Witpen, where he lived. He says : " When Schlatter had arrived in this country, and according to his commission had been in the country, and on his return entered my house, I could not continue much longer in my work on account of my years and the many fatigues I endured, and I longed that my burden might be lessened. I therefore revealed to him that Skippack had scattered itself and there was nothing there any more, but four miles away was Gosheuhoppen with a union church. The distance from there to Germantown was twenty-four miles, in which no Reformed service was held. My house was almost midway between Old Gosheu- hoppen and Germantown. I also knew that there lived around me many Reformed people desirous for their true service. I asked him whether he did not think it advisa- ble to organize a congregation in that district, however with the provision that it should be under the Church of Holland, and when I died it would not be forsaken, other- wise it would not be worth while to organize it for the few days which I had to live yet. But if he thought this wise and knew means to this end, and if he thought I could be supported in this work so as to have a scant living, then I would be willing to be somewhat quieter in my old age and contented with this small congregation, and thus con- tinue my life in the service of the Lord. He therefore assured me that I should not be forsaken, and he would make favorable mention of it in his report to Holland. He also deemed it wise to organize a congregation in this place on account of the distance of the other places." 366 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. He then describes how Schlatter came there on Feb- ruaiy 3, 1747, and preached a sermon in his house. It was cold, and only a few gathered. They elected three elders, and Schlatter found they could contribute only six pounds and three shillings. He said they must give fif- teen pounds, or he could not write to Holland for help. Boehm says : " I was very sorry for the souls that were sad when they heard this, for although they were only a few, yet they were dear souls and desirous of salvation. I told him to describe it to Holland, and I would accept it for fifteen pounds (a year)." Boehm says he pledged them services every two weeks, and when he was home, every Sunday. He then patheti- cally describes the first building : " We at Witpen (now Boehm's church, Montgomery county) erected a small stone church on the lot which we bought, and had well insured. The interior of the church is thirty feet long and twenty-seven feet wide. According to agreement I had fin'ty pounds for this purpose, which money I had collected in New York as early as October, 1 735, for a church lot in behalf of the now scattered con- gregation at Skippack. But the church costs more than seventy pounds. It is well built, with durable walls and roof, door and shutters. It is still without windows, and within devoid of all necessary things, so that more than fifty pounds are yet needed. But we can not hel}) our- selves, for there are but few of us, and we are without means. Therefore we will sooner use the church as it is, as we have done throughout the whole summer, and sit on EVENTS BETWEEN 2d AND 3d COETUS. 367 the bare ground and on wooden benches, rather than make debts, for if we should make debts, I should have to suffer for it." This was the last letter of Boehm. In that letter he seems to have felt the shadow of coming events — death. He had limited himself to the pastoral care of that one congregation at Witpen. But his missionary spirit could not be repressed, and so we find him going out to supply distant congregations. A request came to him about the beginning of 1749 to supply the congregations at Macungie and Egypt, then on the borders of the Indian wilderness, and he consented, January, 1749. Perhaps an additional reason for doing so was the fact that his son had moved up in that neighborhood. It was while supplying this con- gregation that he suddenly died. He went to Egypt to celebrate the communion, preached the preparatory sermon, April 29, and died that night suddenly at the house of his son. As no Reformed minister was in that distant district, the funeral sermon was preached by a Mennonite minister, Michael Kolb, a neighbor of his son.* Schlatter did not hear of Boehm's death till May 2, for he had been on a missionary tour to Lancaster, where he administered the communion on April 28. From Lancaster he had intended to visit Weiss, but hearing of Boehm's death, he went direct to Philadelphia, where on May 7 he preached Boehm's funeral sermon at Germantown, in which he * It seems a strange providence that after Boehm had so severely attacked the sects, one of them should preach his funeral sermon. 368 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. declared that Boehni's memory was cherished as blessed by many. So ended the life of the founder of the German Reformed Church of the United States. He deserves great honor for his self-denying labors and faithful loyalty to the Reformed Church. His activity for her should never be forgotten. Schlatter's diligence was very great. He traveled, he said, 8000 miles in five years. But Bcehm traveled more than Schlatter. He declared, July 9, 1744, that for eighteen years he traveled 104 miles every month to his congregations. At that rate, traveling for twenty- three years (1725-1748), when he gave up his congrega- tion to Leydich, he had traveled 28,704 miles, a record never approached by any minister of our Church, not even by Schlatter. He was a man of great self-denial also. For twenty-four years (nearly a quarter of a century) he preached the gospel almost without pay, receiving about twenty-four dollars a year, and having therefore to support himself and his large family by farming. The only gift he received from Holland was $123.60. But far above all his other characteristics stands his devotion to the Reformed Church. True, he sometimes seems severe on his opponents, but it is mainly because he thinks they arc injuring that Church which was dearer to him than life. Anything that interfered with its prosperity touched him to the core. It is, however, to be noticed that after the coming of Schlatter, and especially after the EVENTS BETWEEN 2d AND 3d COETUS. 369 coetus was organized, his severer traits mellow, perhaps also because of increasing age. We know of nothing more beautiful in his life than his forgiveness of Li schy. Boehm was intense in his nature, strong in his likes and dislikes, and such persons find it hardest to forgive. Now, no one in all his ministry had given him so much trouble as Lischy, unless it had been Goetschi, and that is not prob- able. Boehm was severe on Lischy when he was a Mora- vian, but when he was convinced that Lischy had thor- oughly turned back to the Reformed, as was shown by his published Second Declaration and also by his confession of faitli, no one forgave Lischy more heartily than Boehm. Tin's is all tlie more remarkable in a man of such strong likes and dislikes as Boehm. He thus writes in his last letter : " Concerning Mr. Lischy, I must say that he has completely won my heart by his beautiful confession before the coetus, so tliat no\v, as true as the Lord liveth, I mean it well with him and rejoice in my soul about him." He then describes how Lischy had tried to make him out as a liar about him, and then says : " Now, since Lischy was a Moravian and corrupted, my soul does all the more rejoice over the great grace of God which he experienced. For my part, I have good hope that he will in the future be a good co-laborer to our true Church. May God who alone is the searcher of hearts grant him His blessing." Very beautifully does Dotterer in his excellent little" monograph on Boehm's life describe his labors : " At that 24 370 THE GERMAN EEFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. time few lawful roads had been laid out for travel, and he had to thread his toilsome journey on horseback through the deep forest, over hill and across streams, over rough and torturous paths. At intervals of miles apart he would come upon the clearing made by the hardy settler, slu4- tered in a newly made log hut. At these rude firesides he would be a welcome guest. Here he comforted the afflicted and homesick, and at their Sabbath gatherings he brought to them those gospel blessings denied to them since they left their German homes. These many years he baptized their children, catechised the youth, married the young and buried the old. The record of his pastoral work, could we read it, would tell a thrilling tale and would throw a flood of light upon the family and general history of primitive Pennsylvania." Thus passed to his rest Boehm, the founder, the organizer and the defender of our Church.* * For fuller details of his descendants, see "Rev. John Philip Boehm," by Henry S. Dotterer, Philadelphia, 1890. CHAPTER lY.— SECTION V. THE THIRD COETUS (SEPTEMBER 27 AND OCTOBER 20-24, 1749). The second coetus had determined to have its next meeting in the country, with one of the largest congrega- tions, namely at Lancaster. To Lancaster then the mem- bers of the coetus went, and its session was opened on September 27 (October 8, N. S.) with a sermon by Ley- dich. Just as it opened, they learned that a new minister had arrived at Philadelphia, September 25, sent over by the Holland deputies, Rev. John Conrad Steiner. As he had letters to them from the Holland deputies, they adjourned to October 20, when they would again meet in Philadelphia. The congregation at Lancaster, which had been bereft of its pastor by the death of Hochreutiner, earnestly entreated that the new minister be sent to them, and they gave Schlatter authority to give Steiner a call. Schlatter returned to Philadelphia on the 29th, and met Steiner and welcomed him, and on October 1, after having read his testimonials, he presented him with the call to the Lancaster congregation, which promised him $240 annually, beside his lodgings and fuel. The minutes of the third coetus (October 20) at Phila- 372 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. delphia have been lost. We can gather only a few of its acts from some references to it. The coetus acts were signed by five Reformed ministers. They were Schlatter, Steiner, Rieger, Weiss, Leydich. Bartholomaeus was not there, but word came from his elder that he was not well. The two Dutch students, Marinus and DuBois, were also in attendance. There were sixteen elders, many of the vacant congregations, therefore, being again represented. Steiner could not attend its sessions, as he was sick, as were his wife and two sons, but through an elder of the Philadelphia congregation he sent his testimonials from the Holland deputies. Rieger was president and Weiss was clerk. The coetus continued till October 24, when it was closed with a hearty thanksgiving, says Schlatter, for its unity of sentiment. From different sources we have gained five of its acts. One was that Conrad Tempelman and J. C. Wirtz were present on probation as candidates for the ministry. Another was in regard to the Lancaster congregation. This congregation was represented in the coetus by Paul Weitzel and Casper Schaffncr. They had pressed their call on Steiner by personally calling on him. As he was sick and could not attend the meetings, the coetus sent a committee to him to ask him whether he would leave the decision of the matter to the coetus. Weiss and Leydich were the committee. Steiner received them kindly, and 4eclare(^ he Avould be satisfied witli whatever the coetus THE THIRD COETUS. 373 would decide. Coetus decided that he should go to Lan- caster, and in connection with it serve the congregations at Muddy Creek, Erlentown and White Oaks, especially as Rieger as president of the coetus could aid him in serv- ing Laueaster to some extent, as that congregation had now become reconciled to him again. And as Steiner had declared that he would rather live in the country, they suggested that as there was a comfortable parsonage at Muddy Creek, he might live there. He could then preach one Sunday at Lancaster, the next at White Oaks, the next at Erlentown, and the fourth at Muddy Creek. However, the elders present from I^ancaster did not agree to this arrangement, but strenuously asked that Steiner be given to the Lancaster congregation alone, and besides, they did not want llieger. Another item was in connection with the Reilf money. Schlatter had been severely criticised by some of the Phil- adelphia congregation for his method of settling that case, as for giving lleilf a clear cliaracter at the settlement, and also for keeping part of the money. Coetus deemed it wise, therefore, to take an action in regard to it, so as to clear up matters. They passed a decision clearing Schlat- ter, saying that he had acted wisely ; that he had done just what the Holland C^hurch had wanted to be done, although without their instructions he had given the con- gregation in Philadelphia lialf the money. Another item was the complaint of part of the Phila- 374 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. delphia congregation against Schlatter. The coetus here decided against the complainants. Coetus declared there was nothing in the complaints that would make Schlatter unworthy of his office, as they charged, but that the com- plainants were moved to their action by such personal bit- terness as to be deserving of censure. They therefore decided Schlatter was innocent, and urged the congregation to peace. This last action was signed by Rieger, Weiss, Leydich and, strange to say, also by Steiner, although the opponents to Schlatter were the friends of Steiner. A fifth action of coetus asked Schlatter to send the minutes of the meeting to Holland. When it became finally known that Steiner was not going to Lancaster, Weichsel wrote to Schlatter, December 3, 1749, describing the sad condition of Lancaster, and asking for a pastor. Before January 28, 1750, Schlatter sent them Rev. Lewis Frederick Vock. In their agree- ment they agree to pay him $96.00 annually. Han- schuh, the Lutheran pastor there, on whom he called, January 29, speaks of him as an aged man, and said he hoped he would prove an efficient worker. But by Sep- tember Saur reports in his paper a division in that congre- gation. Before a half a year had passed there was trouble. On July 22 Vock preached his farewell sermon, but by August 19 he was permitted by his opponents to return. His life seems to have been improper. And on September 16 Rieger (probably referring to Vock) published in Saur's THE THIRD OOETUS. 375 paper a warning to all Reformed congregations to be on their guard against religious adventurers who pretend to be ministers. Thus the Lancaster congregation had been singularly unfortunate. Schnorr had disgraced them, Hochreutiner had accidentally killed himself, Steiner refused to come and Vock proved unworthy. CHAPTER IV.— SECTION VI. THE SCHLATTER AND STEINER CONTROVERSY IN PHILADELPHIA. This unfortunate controversy proved to be the begin- ning of strife in the coetus for a number of years, but it did not begin with Steiuer's coming. He was not the cause of it, but the instrument used by it. The seeds of it were sown before he arrived. Leydich, in a letter to Hol- land some years later, says that the difficulties between Schlatter and the congregation had begun even before he arrived in Philadelphia on September 15, 1748, more than a year before Steiner arrived. These difficulties had been brought before the coetus in 1748, but Boehm, by his experience, influence and wise counsels, had managed to make peace, and so they were healed over for a time. But the trouble burst out afresh. Saur, in his German paper, reports as early as August 2, 1747, that there was already a division in the Philadelphia congregation. The full report of the case, with all the papers, was transmitted to Holland, and from it we gain a very complete and inter- esting history of the case. Saur says that Schlatter demanded of the congregation that they give him a call which would make him their SCHLATTER AND STElNER CONTROVERSY. 377 pastor for life, to which mauy of the congregation objected, as they did not want to be bound to him for life. The example of another Reformed congregation, namely at Lancaster, which had made a similar arrangement with Schnorr, and was compelled to keep him after they had been disgraced by his ungodly life, was an example quoted by the opponents of Schlatter. Saur, in the article quoted above, probably did not state the matter quite correctly, as we shall see, for he was not a friend to church people or to Schlatter. But there is this substance of truth in it — it is evident that the Philadelphia quarrel began before Steiner ever arrived. There were two main difficulties between them : 1. A Constifutiooial Difficulty. On July 12 the consistory proposed a call to Schlatter, in which he was to preach every Sunday once, either morning or afternoon, and the school-master to catechise at the other service. When he preached in the morning the school-master was to catechise in the afternoon, and when he preached in the afternoon the school-master was to cate- chise and read a sermon in the morning. He was to teach according to the Heidelberg Catechism, and when he did not do so, the consistory had power to remove him. Some- where about this time occurred the hat vote. He took the call he drew up, and which the consistory had refused, into the pulpit and read it. Then he took the vote, saying : " Those who are on my side, put their hats on." Tlie vote 378 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. revealed quite a division in the congregation. On August 4 Schlatter submitted two calls to the consistory for adop- tion. The first call said that they called him at the advice of their former pastor Boehm. He was to preach, catechise, administer the sacraments and observe Church discipline according to the Heidelberg Catechism and the constitution of the synod of Dort. He was to preach once every Sun- day, administer the communion four times a year, but have four free Sundays. It offered him no fixed salary, on account of the great debt of the church building, but they promised to keep him as long as he preached the pure gospel and lived a right life. This call was refused by the consistory. The other call was much like this, but was signed by a large number of the Philadelphia congregation. So it seems that Schlatter had fortified his case by having a large number of the congregation sign this call before it was presented to the consistory. Schlatter was right constitutionally. The congregation having come under the coetus, was bound not to act in an independent manner, and accept or dismiss its pastor at will. The proper way would have been to ask coetus to acquiesce in the dismissal. But on the other hand it is to be remembered that the congregation had not been accus- tomed to that method of doing things. There had been no coetus in existence before whose authority could be invoked. Each congregation had been accustomed to act independently, and the Philadelphia SCHLATTER AND STEINER CONTROVERSY. 379 congregation was loth to give up its rights. The ill for- tune of the Lancaster congregation in Schnorr's case had prejudiced them against a permanent call. Schlatter had proposed to them the form of call in use in Holland, which was indefinite as to the time when the pastoral rela- tion would cease. But they misunderstood this indefinite- ness to mean permanence, and supposed it meant, as Saur says, a call for life. 2. A Financial Difficulty. A cause for this uneasy state of feeling was the large debt of the church. When Schlatter went to Europe, 1751, the debt was $1920. Bcehm says Schlatter had led them to complete their church extravagantly, promising them a great deal of help from Holland. When this help did not materialize, a reaction naturally came against Schlatter. His enemies also complained bitterly about his actions in the Reiff matter — that he had given them only 60 pounds of it, and of this had taken back 15 pounds, because he said the congregation owed him 20 pounds. They say they then raised the 20 pounds, when he kept that also. They were especially bitter that he had given Reiif a public exoneration when he settled with him — declaring him an innocent man. This they said Schlatter should not have done, as every one knew Reiff was dis- honest in the transaction. Schlatter, on the other hand, claimed that the building committee, which consisted of six or eight members, began to assume rights in building 380 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. which he considered arrogant. They replied that when the ground for the church was bought, Schlatter wanted his name to be entered with those of the three elders who bought it. They refused, and then Schlatter, they said, declared in a sermon that there were three men in the con- gregation who wanted to be masters. His opponents, on the other hand, declare that since Boehm's death he had wanted to be pope of the Reformed Church in Pennsyl- vania. Thus a number of the prominent members were at odds with Schlatter. Such was the condition of aifairs when Steiner arrived. It was a most unfortunate thing for Schlatter that the coetus met at Lancaster, and that he was away when Stei- ner arrived, for it gave his opponents an opportunity to arrange matters against him in his absence. Steiner says that when he arrived at Philadelphia, he was met on ship- board by two of the officers of the congregation, who took him and his family to their homes. As Schlatter was out of town, they asked him to preach for them the coming Sunday. They told him of their differences with Schlat- ter, but he says he counselled them to peace and put them off till after the coetus would meet, October 20.* • llarbaugh speaks of Sleiner's acts as an ungrateful return to Schlatter as his beuefaclor. We do not defend Steiner's course, as he was acting un- constitutionally in getting into another minister's congregation. But at the same time it was not ingratitude to Schliitter. Schlatter had not brought him over to Pennsylvania, but the Holland deputies had sent him, just as they had before sent Schlatter. The charge of ingratitude to Schlatter falls to the ground, although the charge of unconstitutionality does not. SCHLATTER AND STEINER CONTROVERSY. 381 Meanwhile, before the adjourned coetus met at Phila- delphia, Steiner on October 3 wrote to Lancaster that he would come and preach for them on the 15th. Schlatter also wrote to Lancaster, telling them that Steiner would come and asking the consistory to send a horse. To be sure that they would do this, he took the trouble to send a second letter to them, in case the first might be lost. He was evidently anxious to get Steiner away from Philadel- phia. He urged them to receive Steiner, giving him an excellent recommendation, and stating that he came prop- erly recommended by the Holland Church and worthy of all confidence. The congregation twice sent a horse for Steiner. The first time his wife was sick, and he did not like to leave her, and when the second came, he himself was sick. Steiner, however, waited until coetus before deciding about the Philadelphia matter. Even at the time of the coetus he expressed a willingness to go to Lancaster. All this shows that Steiner was not the only one to blame in this matter. He was the creature of circumstances to some extent. It seems very likely, too, that the action of the coetus did not entirely suit him, as it certainly did not suit the Lancaster congregation. The coetus had tried to make him cover too much territory by making him pastor of the Muddy Creek charge, as well as of Lancaster. Against this the Lancaster elders protested. Rieger, as Steiner was absent, tried his hand at the matter, so as to 382 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S, get a chance to preach again in Lancaster. There was selfish motive, we fear, in Rieger's management of the case. The result was, that by Rieger's manipulating it so that he preached at Lancaster, Steiner had too large a charge, and no one was satisfied. Steiner saw in all this a chance to withdraw mthout dishonor to himself. It is possible, if the coetus had left the single call to Lancaster for Steiner, he might have gone. Leaving the action of the coetus, let us watcli the actions of the congregation. On October 5 the old con- sistory took action, dismissing Schlatter as their pastor. This action was signed by Daniel Ronton the leading elder, Hillegass, and even by Steinmetz, the elder who had at first received Schlatter, and with whom he stayed for mouths after he arrived. The next day a protest was sent to the consistory by more than eighty members of the congregation, who were Schlatter's friends. The consis- tory then sent a petition to coetus, October 2L The coetus, as we have seen, decided against the con- sistory. This action, in favor of Schlatter, was read twice on October 22 before the congregation, and declared them worthy of censure. On the next day, October 2.'), the consistory made a reply to the coetus. They declared that they were surprised at the action of the coetus, and stated that they would close their pulpit to Schlatter and SCHLATTER AND STEINEE CONTROVEESY. 383 appeal from the coetus to the Holland synod.* Later the consistory receded from this appeal to Holland, because they were afraid that Schlatter might have too much influence against them there. On November 17 Schlatter sent a note to the consistory, asking a reply within eight days as to whether they would acknowledge the Holland synod or not, and whether they had appealed, asking for a copy of their charges against him, so that he might know what defence to make. On November 28 Steiner wrote a long letter to the deputies in Holland, giving the reasons for not accepting Lancaster. He says : 1, That coetus had spoiled matters, rather than set them right : that he had come between the churches of Philadelphia and Lancaster as between water and fire, and finally decided for Philadelphia, because it called him first, and in spite of all opposition persevered in it. 2. That if he had not accepted the congregations at Phil- adelphia and Germantown, they would have gone down. He then states the charges made against Schlatter, * It has been charged that the reason why they went against Schlatter, was because they were oppo-ed to the Holland control, f but now they say they would appeal to Holland. If they were opposed to the jurisdiction of Holland, why would they appeal to them? They had been under the classis of Amsterdam for fifteen years, ever since Bcehm became their pastor in 1734, and now they say they will appeal to the Dutch for a decision in their case. Besides, their selection of Steiner could not have been misconstrued into an opposition to Holland, for he had been sent over by the Holland deputies, and was as much of a predestinarian as Schlatter, as both had to sign the Canons of Dort before the Holland synods would ever send them. t Dubbs' History of the Reformed Church, page 283. 384 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. namely desire to rule, indolence, feebleness in preaching, and dissatisfaction with his salary. Steiner defends the action of the congregation. During this controversy Schlatter had the sympathy and support of the other members of the coetus. On November 27 Leydich wrote to him, as did Weiss on November 29 ; Rieger wrote to him in December, as did Bartholomaeus, December 27. Outside of his own denom- ination, Schlatter had the sympathy of the clergy. Steiner having asked their opinion, received a reply, November 14, from Brunholz and Muhlenberg of the laitheran Church, and Gilbert Tennant of the Presbyterian, giving decision against his party. Then Steiner replied (Novem- ber 20), thanking them for their decision, but giving the reasons for his actions. They reply on November 30 to him. On December 12, as the Christmas season was approaching, the consistory notified Schlatter that they would not permit him to celebrate the Lord's Supper in tlie church. Schlatter refused (December 14) to accept this notice from them. He claimed that their acts were unconstitutional, because he was president of the consistory, had not signed the call for their meeting, and because it was done without the knowledge of himself or of the greater number of the members. (When the vote was taken, it stood 110 for Schlatter to 140 for Steiner.) Schlatter replied that he would lay all the papers before the approaching coetus appointed to meet at Philadelphia SCHLATTER AND STEINER CONTROVERSY. 385 in December, to try his case, and to it he asked them to bring their complaints. On December 16 he notified them that the coetus meeting would not be held on account of the extreme cold weather.* Saur says that Schlatter wanted to resign before the end of the year and preach his farewell sermon on Matt. 23 : 37-39, but he was so sad that he could not explain the passage, and only read Matt. 10 : 14. As the coetus did not meet to settle the case, Schlat- ter's friends decided that they must do something, so on December 18 they met and elected a new consistory. The authority was given to the new consistory for Schlatter, with Tennant and Vock as witnesses. The new con- sistory's first step was to forbid (December 19) Steiner to preach. On January 5 they protest against the call given by the old consistory to Steiner. The old consistory, in its turn, took action, January 5, forbidding Schlatter to preach in the church, as they had installed Steiner. On January 7 Steiner preached his introductory sermon in the church at Germantown. On January 12 Attorney General Francis made overtures to the Schlatter party in the interest of peace, suggesting a compromise that Stei- ner and Schlatter preach alternate Sundays. The Schlat- ter party granted it to the Steiner party, as to Steiner as * The real reason was, the ministers refused to come, Weiss and Lejdich especially. 25 386 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. a stranger, but not as pastor. This did not suit the Stei- ner party, and was not agreed upon. On January 14 matters came to an open controversy in the church. Steiner was to preach his introductory sermon on that Sunday. But the Schlatter party came first and took possession of the church, when Schlatter ordained and installed his new consistory. (On January 14 Schlatter and his party made a proposition to the oth- ers, and on January 20 the Steiner party agree that one should preach in the forenoon and the other in the after- noon, but then the Schlatter party was not Avilling, Jan- uary 22.) On January 28 the Steiner party got ahead. They stayed in the church all night, and with a body guard of 24 took possession of the pulpit. Steiner was in the pulpit when the Schlatter party came in. Schlatter requested Steiner to come from the pulpit, which he refused. Confusion reigned for about two hours. The Schlatter party sang the 119th Psalm, so as to prevent Steiner and his party from gaining the church. Schlatter invoked the aid of the magistrate, and he was brought into the church when the Steiner party sang. Then they came to an agreement to give the church keys to the city authorities, until they could come to an amicable adjustment of the matter. The Schlatter party had, Jan- uary 27, made overtures to leave the matter in the hands of arbitrators, each party giving bonds for adherence to their decision. This was finally accepted by the old con- SCHLATTER AND STEINER CONTROVERSY. 387 sistory. The bond was issued by both parties, February 20, and the matter left to six arbitrators. The Steiner party made a condition, however, that no ministers, judges or lawyers were to be the arbitrators. They were evidently afraid of ministers, as the Lutheran and Pres- byterian ministers had already sided against them. This agreement was made before the mayor, Mr. Lawrence ; the judge, William Allen, and the alderman, Benjamin Shoemaker. The arbitrators were William Clymer, Thomas Lord, Hugh Robert, John Mifflin, John Smith and Abel James, all of them Quakers, except Clymer, who was an Episcopalian. The old consistory filed their charges against Schlatter. They were : 1. Discipline, deception and falsehood. Schlatter had promised them aid from Holland, a promise which he had not fulfilled. 2. In the Reiif matter he had given them only forty- five pounds, although their church was so terribly in need of the money, and he had ninety pounds still in his hands, which he would not turn over, because he said he had no order from Holland to do so. But that when he found that the church at Germantown was threatening to dis- miss him, he secretly promised to give them twenty pounds, and later on fifty pounds, of this money. 3. That although several of the elders had incurred a debt of 400 pounds voluntarily, in order to purchase the ground rent of the lot, he had the title of it made out to the Holland Fathers and to himself. 388 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. 4. That although he had led the church into great debt, he had given them no assistance. 5. That he lorded over them and was more of a mas- ter than a pastor. (They say in a letter that he scolded them, and was incapable and unfit.) 6. Although they paid him twice as much as they had promised him, yet he was never satisfied. 7. That he produced disorder in the congregation. 8. He was so cold and slack in his activity, that many had grown careless. In instructing the youth he had been indolent, and also in visiting the sick and baptizing the children. The arbitrators met, Clymer being the chairman, and, after three weeks' examination and deliberation, they ren- dered their decision, March 6, 1750. It is in substance as follows : As to the charges, they decide : 1. The Holland letters show that Schlatter had a right to give assurance of help to the congregation. 2. That Sclilatter did about the ReifF money as ordered. He had submitted his account to the arbitra- tors, and of the 135 pounds he still had 34. And also he had not attempted to bribe the Germantown congregation with the money. 3. That Schlatter did not pocket any of the alms of the congregation, as had been charged. SCHLATTEE AND STEINER CONTROVERSY. 389 4. That he did not get the title to the land in his own name, so as to have it as his own. 5. That he was not dictatorial. 6. That if he found fault with them, it was because the men who now represented the Steiner party urged him to do so. 7. That he did not cause the divisions in the congre- gation, but that the elders who summoned him, did so. 8. That he was faithful in pastoral work. As to reports against him at his birthplace, his testi- monials were sufficient in reply. , They therefore declared that the charges against Schlat- ter were false, unfounded and insufficient. Their decision was that the old consistory transfer the church property to the Schlatter consistory and congregation. But they ordered the Schlatter consistory to pay to diffisreut parties sums amounting to about 750 pounds. The Schlatter party, which during the interim had been worshiping twice a Sunday in Tennant's Presbyterian church (the Whitefield's church, as it was called), now again took pos- session of the old church buildiug. Thus Schlatter was completely vindicated. He wrote to the Holland depu- ties, April 6, giving an account of the trial. Peters, the secretary of state, in writing to the deputies, says : " The cause of the whole trouble was Schlatter's refusal to pay the whole of the Reiff funds to the Philadelphia congre- gation." Saur in his paper says that at the end of the 390 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. trial the Steiner party uumbered 170 and the Schlatter 120. The Steiner party, which had been worshiping in a private house, proceeded to build a building, not far from the old church, wliieh should be used for a store as well as for service. Tliev clung to their idea not to engao-e a minister for more than a year at a time, so that the min- ister might not become master over them, referring to Matt. 23: 6-12. In a later letter, October 16, 1750, Schlatter again defends himself against : a) The charge of indolence, by referring to his exten- sive correspondence with Holland (he says that since he had been in Pennsylvania, he had spent only two Sab- baths without preaching.) In four years and two months he had preached 581 times, and traveled in Pennsylvania, Maryland and Virginia 7000 miles, one-third of the earth's circumference. 6) Pride and haughtiness. This he denies. c) Avarice and luxury. He had received in four and a half years $580, and had spent $140 more than he had received. He had been at the expense of entertaining the coetus whenever they had met in Philadelphia, and the longest journey he had undertaken at his own costs. The deputies reply to him, January, 1751, that they are greatly pleased that he has been proved innocent. So ended the first stage of the Schlatter-Steiner quar- rel, but the seeds of strife sown in 1749 keep the coetus embroiled in controversy till 1755, and later. CHAPTER IV.— SECTION YII. SCHLATTER'S TRIP TO EUROPE (1751-52). • In the spring of 1747 Schlatter had written to the deputies, suggesting that it might be well for him to come back to Holland, so as to interest their Church in Penn- sylvania, and also to look up ministers for this western work. But the deputies had refused to grant his request, because they were afraid his work would suffer during his absence. Three years later he unexpectedly takes the trip, unknown to the deputies. After the coetus of 1749, Schlatter, owing to the unfortunate division in the congregation at Philadelphia, was not able to travel around among the congregations as much as he had done formerly. Nor was it necessary, for the congregations by that time had become sufficiently organized. He still visited the congregations in western New Jersey in June, 1750. He also made church visita- tions, August 20-25, of congregations in the country, so that he might give information to the coming coetus about them. He also made a journey, November 1-10, 1750. He went (November 1) to Witpen, which he regularly supplied once a month since Boehm's death, and adminis- tered the communion to thirty-six members. After the 392 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHITRCH IN U. S. tlianksgiviDg sermon he went twenty-three miles farther to Falkner Swamp, to visit Leydich, and on the 2nd with him to visit Weiss. Leydich consented to preach for him the next Sunday, so tliat he could continue his journey. Schlatter then went to Oley, and on the 3rd he arrived at Tulpehocken. In this journey he was at times in danger, because of the wintry weather and overflowing streams. On the 4th he assisted Bartholomaeus in administering the Lord's Supper. Bartholomaeus promised to be present at the coming coetus, if his health would permit. Schlatter then went to Lancaster, where he preaclied on the 6th, and invited Rieger to attend the coetus, which he prom- ised to do. He preached at three other places on his way home, and arrived at Philadelphia on the 10th. He did not see Lischy on this trip, because the latter had gone, at Schlatter's earnest solicitation, to visit the congregations in Virginia. On November 16 the coetus met at Phila- delphia. Of this coetus we have no record, because he seems to have given an account of it orally to the depu- ties when he arrived in Holland. We find only a refer- ence to the coetus. A¥e know, however, that Weiss, Ley- dich and Schlatter were present. On December 13 a special coetus was held at Phila- delphia. The outlook for the Church in Pennsylvania was not the most ho})eful. Matters had not been pro- gressing since the Steiner controversy. The Holland deputies had not been sending over any more ministers, or Schlatter's trip to Europe. 393 fuuds or letters. Nor had they given a decision on some of the important matters referred to them. Bartholomaeus was sick and becoming insane. Thus the number of min- isters was lessening, while the charges were clamoring for ministers. Of the sixteen charges reported by Schlatter, ten charges, representing thirty-two congregations, were vacant. And of the charges that had ministers, three were supplied only by candidates for the ministry, who could not administer the sacraments. These were Tem- pelman, DuBois and Lischy, as the deputies liad not yet rendered a decision on their cases. Only twelve congre- gations had regular ministers, and these at best only once a Sunday, and some of them barely once a month. On the other hand, although the Moravian ^novement had spent its force, yet independent Reformed ministers were springing up, some of them with, but more of them with- out, ordination, and leading the congregations astray. In view of the unsatisfactory state of affairs, the special coctus (at which Weiss, however, was not present) decided that one of their number should go to Europe and lay their case before the Holland deputies. To this mission Schlat- ter was appointed. He lost no time in getting ready, although it Avas winter, when the passage across the ocean was dangerous. On December 25 he administered tlie communion to his Philadelphia congregation for the last time. His passport was given him by the governor, James Hamilton, January 29, He sailed from Newcastle, 394 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. Delaware, February 5, 1751. He arrived at Dartmouth, March 11 ; at Bristol, March 15, and at London, March 22. He left London, March 31, and arrived at Helvoet- sluys, in Holland, April 12. Schlatter appeared before the deputies at the Hague, May 3. He delivered to them his journal and other papers. He reported the results of his labors, and also the condition of the Church. He also stated that he had organized the churches, also a coetus, and made church visitation. He made a report, that in order to supply the deficiency in salaries of pastors and school-masters, $800 a year would be necessary. He said the congregations were unable to make up traveling expenses to bring ministers across the ocean to them. He also reported what he had done with the Bibles sent over ; and with the Reiff money, that he had on hand thirty-four pounds and six shillings, and had given the rest away at the orders of the deputies. He also presented a paper giving reasons why, at the request of the coetus, he was present with them in Hol- land, and also asked to be allowed to resign his commis- sion. He gives as a reason for this the precarious state of the Church and the inability of six ministers to care for 30,000 souls. He also suggests that a fund ought to be raised to make up for this deficiency of salaries in Penn- sylvania. He asked of them three things : 1. A donation of money to cover his traveling expenses to Switzerland. 2. A testimonial of his conduct in Pennsylvania. Schlatter's trip to Europe. 395 3. An action clearing him in his controversy with Steiner. The deputies were very much pleased with his report. They voted him $20.00 for his traveling expenses, and gave him the testimonials he asked for. He did not, how- ever, at once proceed to Switzerland, and when asked at the next meeting of the deputies why he had not gone, he replied it was owing to lack of money. It looked as if Schlatter might leave the service of the Pennsylvania churches, but circumstances ordered it otherwise. From the deputies he went to Amsterdam, and appeared before the classis there. Here renewed interest arose. The classis expressed itself as satisfied with his exoneration in the Steiner controversy, and became so much interested in his account of Pennsylvania that they asked him to prepare an Appeal,* which could l)e printed and placed in the hands of the classes and synods, in order to see if better means could not be devised to aid the thou- sands of souls famishing tliere. The classis decided to print this. A liberal member, J. Loveringh, a deacon and bookseller, published it at his own expense, none to be sold but those signed by himself, so that no attempt might be made by others to make money out of the transaction. The diary of Schlatter, which composes the main part * This Appeal was afterwards translated into German and published by Fresenius, but although Rev, Mr. Thomson, of the English Reformed church of Amsterdam, was ordered to prepare an English translation of it, we have not yet found a copy of it. 396 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. of the volume, had a preface by the classis, dated June 28, after which comes an introduction by Schlatter, and then his diary from June 1, 1746, to his return to Holland in 1751. This is followed by a description of the religious destitution of Pennsylvania and the adjoining provinces, in which he describes the Indians, the number of his con- gregations, and on the basis of this he makes an earnest appeal, which is followed by a special appeal in behalf of the Indians, in which he refers to tlie work of Brainard and Eliot among them. A few closing words, which are dated June 25, end the book. In this Appeal he suggests the idea that an effort be made to get tlie states general of Holland (the congress) to do something to supply these destitute Germans with the gospel. Schlatter did not start off to Switzerland as soon as he expected, partly because of lack of money, and partly because the classis, which had already done so much, desired him to wait until after the synods met in the summer. We next find Schlatter at the synod of South Holland, at Leerdam, where there was given each member a copy of his printed Appeal. The synod expressed itself pleased with his work, and exonerated liim in the case of the Steiner quarrel. The synod ordered that Lischy be installed at York, Marinus, Dubois and Tempelmau examined and ordained in the name of the synod of South Holland. These were the cases that had been lianging fire for so long a time. Schlatter reported that five or six / Schlatter's trip to Europe. 397 additional ministers were needed for Pennsylvania. They requested Schlatter to go to Switzerland to obtain the min- isters required, and determined, with the synod of North Holland, to approach the Prince of Orange and the Lord Pensionary, so that the matter might be brought before the states of Holland and West Fricsland, so as to get financial aid. Schlatter then went to the North Holland synod, which met at Edam, from which he writes a letter, August 3. The North Holland synod took very much the same action as the South Holland, expressing itself satis- fied with Schlatter's work, and joining with South Hol- land in approaching the states of Holland and Friesland for money toward Pennsylvania. And now we come to one of the most interesting epi- sodes in the early history of our Church, and one on which most important results depended, namely the gift by the states of Holland and West Friesland to the Pennsylvania churches. For it was without doubt the money that the political government gave to the Pennsylvania churches for years that laid the foundation of our Church. Such a gift was not a new thing to those states. Holland had given the very amount desired, 800 dollars, to Goetschi in 1735. That was gotten by him through the Pension- ary. If now the same policy be pursued, it would prob- ably produce the same results. Let us watch the pro- ceedings. On August 24 an extra session of the deputies was called to hasten matters before the states. It was 398 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. called because it was learned that the Prince of Orange intended to depart the latter part of the month from the Hague to Aix la Chapelle for the waters, and also that the states general of Holland and West Frieslaud was about to adjourn. The deputies then went to the politi- cal commissioners of the synods. (In each synod there were political commissioners, appointed by the state as the representatives of the state in its sessions.) They now went to the political commissioners in their own synods in order to get advice in what way to secure the fund for Pennsylvania. As they consulted with them, the matter became clearer. Especially did the president, van Klees, advise them well. They had two propositions to make to the states general, either of which might be accepted. One was to get them to grant permission to hold a general collection for Pennsylvania throughout all Holland, or to give a sum of 2000 gulden for some years. Van Klees said he thought the former was not feasible, as it would not succeed, so they decided on the latter. The matter now becomes so interesting that we will give the minutes of the deputies : " Whereupon, on August 25, the deputies waited on the Pensionary, and after wishing him God's most precious blessing, they laid before him the two plans, and asked his advice. Whereupon his Excellency,* after a similar wish ♦ This pensionary "or attorney general was Peter.Steyn."^He gained this position, July 21, 1719, after having been burgomaster of Haarlem. j \Ue was the constant friend of the Pennsylvania churches. Schlatter's trip to Europe. 399 in reply to us, was pleased to answer that very serious objections might be made to asking for permission for the taking of a general collection for Pennsylvania, and hence could not advise that request. But that he would take into consideration further the petitioning for a liberal Christian donation from the States General by the depu- ties. He would make known his opinion on that subject at the proper time to the deputies, and would put forth his good offices for the furthering of our petition. Here- upon the deputies took their leave from his Excellency with thanks. Since Mr. Pensionary, before giving the above favorable answer, had among other things asked us how the deputies came to intercede for Reformed people in an English colony, and we had concisely replied, so far as the opportunity of the time allowed, the deputies now asked Clerk Hoederaaker, in order to advance our petition, to go and wait upon his Excellency with Rev. Mr. Schlatter at his country seat, and give his Excellency full and circumstantial information about the condition of the Pennsylvania Church, and how those churches came under the charitable care of the synods, and add thereto some short Christian notes and extracts from synodical resolution. Deputy Hoedemaker agreed to this, and immediately after the adjournment of the session asked an appointment with his Excellency for the afternoon of August 26. He then carried out his commission as far as the Christian notes were concerned, but as his Excellency could not be seen that afternoon on account of a previous engagement, Hoedemaker recommended them to the Pen- sionary's sick wife." So it was not till August 27 that deputy Hoedemaker 400 THE GEEMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. and Schlatter were able to personally give him extended verbal information. The Acts of the deputies give the following report : " Whereupon the Pensionary invited to dinner at his house on the afternoon of August 27 Clerk Hoedemaker and Rev. Mr. Schlatter, made known to them that his Excellency had on that morning taken with him the afore- said memoranda, and after previous communication of it to his Highness,* who was also present at the meeting of the states. He had introduced the request made by the deputies of his Excellency on August 25, into the session of the Lord's states of Holland and West Friesland on August 27, and it was immediately granted full favorably for the period of five years." Thus the request for $800 was granted on Friday, August 27, and 2000 gulden ($800) was ordered to be given for five years. It was hoped that this would put the work in Pennsylvania on such a firm basis that no more money M'ould be needed. (The old story of the 100,- 000 dollars collected and invested for the Pennsylvania churches is a myth.) This grant by the States General on August 27, 1751, was followed by another, November 30, 1756, to give $800 a year for three years more. On November 29, 1759, a grant of $600 a year was made for * William IV., Prince of Orange, of the line of Nassau, whose line expired with the childless William III, King of England. The principality of Or- EBge then passed over to a collateral line, of which the present Queen of Holland is the last descendant. Of this prince Peter Steyn was a special favorite, and he ?hows it in this present instance. William went to Ai.\ la Chapelle, September .3, 1751. He came back to the Hague, and died there, October 22, 1751, two months later than this interview. Schlatter's trip to Europe. 401 two years, ami on December 5, 1761, a last grant of |400 a year was made for two years more, making a tf)tal of $8400 given in twelve years by the states. In their grant the states say that it mnst l)e applied for the support of ministers and school-masters, and also for the purchase of Bibles, New Testaments, Psalm books, and other books serving for the instruction and comfort of the brethren in the Lord in Pennsylvania. For all this the deputies thanked them, especially Pensionary Steyn, who was mainly instrumental in the success of the scheme. This action of the States General put the work on a | permanent basis. Schlatter was at once sent to Germany ; and Switzerland to get ministers. The deputies gave him 220 dollars for traveling expenses in Holland and Ger- many. They gave him a letter of introduction, and instruc- tions to raise funds for the Pennsylvania work, and also ordered him to seek six ministers, offering them a salary of $180 a year, for which the donations of the states were a guarantee for the first five years. Schlatter started on his journey. He went to Her- born, where he was received with great kindness by pro- fessors Arnoldi, Schramm and Ran, and then through Frankford and Hanau to Heidelberg. There he handed his instructions to the consistory of the Palatinate, who received him very kindly. He says he had a friendly conversation with the consistory, and they decided to send to Pennsylvania a pastoral letter. He arrived at St. Gall, 26 402 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S, October 20. He at first wrote encouragingly about get- ting ministers to go to Pennsylvania, saying that he had met several able candidates, but he afterwards reported from St. Gall (December 1), saying that of the candidates in Germany AV'ho had seemed inclined to go to Pennsylva- nia, the most had drawn back, and that scarcely any one could be secured at St. Gall, because Switzerland herself was in need of ministers. Still, one of the ministers at St. Gall, Pels, had given him ^3.78, the first fruit of the collection for Pennsylvania. And Professor AVegelin, of St. Gall, wrote (December 30) that Schlatter had done everything to get candidates from there. On October 27 he went from St. Gall to Zurich, and Zurich gave him ten ducats for Pennsylvania. He returned to St. Gall, where he remained till about December 19. The cantons of St. Gall, Basle and Zurich did not give liim or his work any official recommendation, but referred it to the coming meeting of the German Protestant cantons at Frauenfeld in the summer. However St. Gall promised to recommend it favorably. He began returning to Heidelberg by way of Basle, and was at Heidelberg, January 21, where the Palatinate consistory gave him, February 4, the pastoral letter to the Germans of Pennsylvania that they had promised, in which they praise the generous efforts of the Dutch in car- ing for their cliildren in Pennsylvania ; and they also speak in commendation of Sclilatter's work, expressing Schlatter's trip to Europe. 403 their paternal affection to their children in Pennsylvania, and urging them to remain true to the Reformed faith of their fathers. But they did not dare order a collection among the churches, because their own revenues had be- come so greatly reduced. Still, to show their interest in the work in Pennsylvania, they gave a donation of about $120. This money was ordered by the Holland deputies to be spent for German Bibles, to be distributed among the Pennsylvania Germans. Schlatter did not find any candidates for Pennsylvania at Heidelberg. His journey so far was comparatively fruitless in gaining ministers, although it stirred up interest in the cause. Only one place remained from which candidates might be gotten, namely Herborn. If that place did not respond, then Pennsylvania must do without ministers. He started for Herborn by way of Frankford. At Frankford he was fortunate in two ways. He succeeded in interesting the German Reformed Church there, so that they gave quite a liberal donation. Hilgenbach, Ritner and Poertnor, the pastors, gave him $24 then, and Poert- ner sent him later $285.88. But perhaps more important was the other, the friendly efforts of Dr. Fresenius, the leading Lutheran minister of Frankford. He had been publishing pamphlets on the liUtheran and Moravian Churches in America. He now expressed himself willing to pul)lish Schlatter's account of the Reformed churches in Pennsylvania, as given by his diary. Schlatter therefore 7( 404 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. added to the Dutch edition of the Appeal a commendatory address to the Swiss confederacy, and also a preface. The first was written at Frankford, February 6, and the latter, February 7. The publication of his Appeal in German gave the cause of the Pennsylvania churches an impulse in Germany and led to the coming of some ministers. But it was Herborn that providentially saved the Penn- sylvania cause. We have seen its previous friendliness, how in 1746 it almost snatched from Schlatter the honor of organizing the Pennsylvania churches, which, but for a delay by the Holland deputies, would probably have taken place. The university of Herborn at that time had most excellent, pious and intellectually strong men in its professorships. Its spirit doctrinally was Calvinism, the practical predestinarianism of Lampe, whose dogmatics was used as a text book. But its professors were also Pietistic (that is, the churchly pietism of the Reformed of Germany). It is noticeable that just as the pietistic uni- versity of the Lutheran Church at Halle, Germany, sent Muhlenberg to organize the Lutheran Church, so the piet- istic Reformed university of Herborn led to the cstiiblish- ment of the German Reformed, in America on a permanent basis. The university was small, not even a university, only a German high school, yet it had three good profes- sors. Professor Valentine Arnoldi, professor of dogmat- ics, at whoso house Sclilatter stayed two weeks, was a man of rare scholarship and lovely character, following in the Schlatter's trip to Europe. 405 footsteps of the Dutch theologians Vitringa and Lampe. He recommended his students to read the Pietistic work, Doddridge's " Rise and Progress of Religion in the Soul." Professor Henry Schramm taifght practical theology and was an apostle of active, aggressive Christianity. Pro- fessor John Eberhard Ran was a celebrated Orientalist. They gave Schlatter all the encouragement they could. In their record book, dated Feb. 25, 1752, Schramm made this entry : " Rev. Mr. Schlatter handed me a list of the candidates he desires to take along with him to Pennsylvania, and prays that we give them a general academical testimonial. Shall they have such ?" Profes- sor Rau answers : " Yes, I hope that there is none who would not rather see, with gladness, that ministers desire such a recommendation, and are advanced to work in a foreign land, rather than in their home country." This is the first speech for foreign missions among the German Reformed in Pennsylvania, whose words have come down to us, for Pennsylvania was then a foreign land.* As a result of Schlatter's own personal efforts, sec- onded by the entire faculty of Herborn, he secured six young men to go to Pennsylvania. He thus describes • If the Germans and the Dutch could thus send money and ministers to us in this foreign land, how much more should we in return send and pass on the gospel to other lands still farther west, as Japan, where the foreign mis- sion of our Church is located. If they had refused to help our forefathers, how lamentable would be our condition as a Church? Can we then withhold our gospel and gifts to other foreign lands, lest the same direful consequences come to them? 406 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. them to the deputies : " 1 . Otterbeiu quiet and pious. 2. Waldschmidt honest and sincere. 3. Hensepeter reso- lute and seeking the good. 4. Stoy intelligent and kind-hearted. 5. FrankenTeld taciturn and willing. 6. Wissler greatly gifted and generous." Professor Arnoldi calls them the flower of the young ministers of the Re- formed Church of that county of Nassau. It is not often that a Church will give up its best blood for a foreign land, but this university gave them excellent testimoni- als to the deputies, as did the state government at Dil- lenburg. Schlatter then set out with these young men, except Hensepeter, who, at the earnest entreaties of his mother, finally decided not to go to America. He was also accom- panied from Frankford by his cousin, Christopher Schlat- ter, of St. Gall. He went from Herborn to Holland, by way of Dillenburg, He appeared before the Holland deputies at their spring meeting, March 0-15, 1752, with his five young men. They were there examined by the deputies. As Otterbeiu and Wissler had already been ordained, the deputies gave a special theological examina- tion to the others, examining them in languages on Gene- sis 1, Psalm 1, John 1 and Acts 7, and also in doctrinal theology, the examination being conducted in Ivatin, as they could not speak Dutch. In this examination Stoy excelled, and Waldschmidt and Fraukenfeld passed well. They then subscribed to the Dutch creeds (the Heidelberg Schlatter's trip to Europe. 407 Catechism and the Caucus of Dort). Ou March 14 they were all set apart with solemn services for the work in Pennsylvania. Heusepeter's place was now filled by auother^ John Casper Rubel, a candidate from the county of Berg, who appeared at the coetus while it was in session. He was examined at an extra coetus, April 5, as the vessel to take Schlatter and the young ministers was to sail ou April 15 for New York. Rubel was examined in the languages on Psalm 118 : 1-26 and Matthew 28, and on the important doctrines of theology. The deputies, being satisfied with the examination, ordained him for the work in Pennsyl- vania, after he had subscribed the Dutch creeds. The deputies gave to Schlatter their instructions for the Penn- sylvania coetus. They declare that they expect yearly reports from the Pennsylvania churches, such as they were receiving from the churches they supported in other parts of the world. These were to be sent to them by a mem- ber of the coetus chosen for that purpose, written either in the Dutch or Latin language. Schlatter also asked of the deputies that he might have permission to remain pastor of the Philadelphia congregation. The deputies gave him such permission, and also gave him a secret letter, not to be used except in case of trouble. This letter ordered him to depose his enemies in Pennsylvania. It also demanded of Steiner $80, which had been paid as his traveling expense to America. If he did not refund that money, 408 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. they would demand of the magistrates to make him restore it. Schlatter does not seem to have used this letter, for the Philadelphia congregation did not give him a chance to become their pastor again after he returned to Pennsylvania. (During all this time he never mentioned to the deputies that he had given a release to the Phila- delphia congregation before he sailed to Europe, agreeing ttiat he would not force himself upon them as their pastor when he returned. This request of his, to be assigned again to Philadelphia, seems to have been a violation of that release.) The deputies, when they later (March 3, 1753) hear of tliis release, were very much surprised at it, and wondered why he had not told them of it while in Holland. After Schlatter's departure with his six young minis- ters, the deputies continued their work of trying to raise funds for the Pennsylvania churches. Hoedemaker wrote to the Antistes Wirtz, of Zurich, May 3, 1752, stating how they had sent Schlatter, and that the Palatinate liad given about $120. He says that the cost of sending Schlatter and the six young ministers was $1600, and requested the Swiss Diet either to ask a free-will offering the next sum- mer, or to do as the Dutch States General had done — give so much money each year. To this letter Wirtz replied (September 23, 1752), statiug that the Swiss, for political reasons, would not give anything, because the emigrants have treated the decrees of the cantons with contempt by going to America. Such an act would be contrary to all Schlatter's trip to Europe. 409 precedent, and might be construed as an approval of their going. Meanwhile, in America the Reformed had not been idle, although matters had been quiet in Schlatter's absence. The coetus of 1751 had been held on September 12. Leydich, Lischy and Weiss seem to have been the only ministers acting together, Weiss not joining very earnestly with them, for he was charged with having been influenced by Steiner. Rieger seems to have left the coe- tus, because Schlatter and he had a controversy. From a hint given somewhere, we are suspicious that it was because of Rieger's want of submission to the Canons of Dort on predestination. For when the strong action of the Classis of Amsterdam on the matter came to Pennsylvania, Schlat- ter, as the representative of the Dutch and of high CJalvin- ism, made the action known to Rieger, whereat they had words, and Rieger went off angry. Those who remained in the coetus, Leydich, Lischy and Weiss, called them- ■' selves the united Reformed minister's, over against the independent Reformed ministers, as Steiner and Rieger, and others. At the suggestion of Lischy, a circular letter had been drawn up, published,* and signed by Leydich, Lischy and Weiss. The two former drew it up, but Weiss approved of it and circulated it in his congregations. In it they urged the forty-one Reformed congregations in Pennsylvania, Virginia and Maryland to pray for the safe * It was wriUen and published between February 2 and March 1(5. 410 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. arrival of Schlatter and the six ministers who were com- ing with him. This circular was distributed widely among the Reformed congregations. These three Reformed min- isters also inserted in Saur's paper, March 7, a notice that all German congregations in Pennsylvania, Maryland and Virginia were, for the sake of their comfort and joy, informed that the Reformed Church of the Netherlands and other lands had taken them under their care. Further information could be obtained of the Reformed ministers of Pennsylvania. It was signed by Weiss, Leydich and Lischy, and was published in the newspaper three times in succession. Meanwhile Schlatter and his party left Amsterdam, April 26, 1752, and had arrived at New Castle, May 12. They left there after June 7, and arrived at New York, July 27. When they arrived at New York, they were presented to Muhlenberg. He gave them Scriptural advice : " Behold, I send you forth as sheep in the midst of wolves. Be ye therefore wise as serpents and harmless as doves." When they arrived at Philadelphia, it hap- pened to be Weiss' turn to supply the pulpit of the Phila- delphia congregation. He remained over the next day (Monday) at Philadelphia, when Leydich and Lischy joined them, and they held a special coetus, without, how- ever, having elders present. (This absence of elders proved to be the entering wedge of trouble, as we shall see.) Schlatter made known to them the instructions of the deputies. They in turn reported the condition of the Schlatter's trip to Europe. 411 Pennsylvania congregations during his absence. He placed in the hands of each of them the St. Gall church order, a brief theological treatise, " The Warning Against the Moravians," by the classis of Amsterdam, " The Anat- omy of the Moravians," by Kulenkamp, containing Lischy's first defence, and also a copy of his Appeal for the Penn- sylvania churches. This special coetus adjourned to meet at Lancaster, October 25. As the Philadelphia congrega- tion was getting into an uproar and appealed to them, they asked it to wait until the regular coetus would be held at Lancaster before it came to any decision about calling a pastor. Schlatter at this coetus reported that he thought that Otterbein ought to go to Lancaster, Stoy to Cocalico, Waldschmidt to remain in Philadelphia with him, Rubel to Tulpehocken, Wissler to Egypt and Frank- enfeld to Monocacy. Waldschmidt was of a mild dispo- sition, and could have gotten along very well as Schlat- ter's assistant, except that he did not afterwards reveal the intellectual qualities such as would be necessary to build up the Philadelphia congregation. Schlatter's action in this regard is the opposite to the release he had given to the consistory when he left for Europe. All the min- isters agreed to this assignment without any opposition, except Rubel, who, upon the arrival of Schlatter's party at Philadelphia, had left the party and gone to a hotel. This plan of Schlatter was somewhat changed, as we shall see, by the rupture of the Philadelphia church, of which we shall speak in the next section. CHAPTER IV.— SECTION VIII. THE RUBEL CONTROVERSY. Mr. Schlatter had hardly arrived from Europe when the elements of discord began to show themselves again. During his absence Steiner had resigned his congregation in Philadelphia, November 6, 1751, and gone to German- town. The Gerraantown congregation was at that time afraid they too might lose him, but to their joy he came to remain with them, and gave them all his time. But on account of their poverty he had to teach school so as to get more money for liviug expenses and enlarge his meagre salary, which was the smaller as he was no recipient of the Holland donations since he had left the coetus. When he heard of Schlatter's arrival he went back to Philadelphia and preached to his former congregation, August 3, per- haps because he wanted to influence his adherents there in regard to Schlatter. During Schlatter's absence the old congregation had also been endeavoring to do something to bring about a union of the Schlatter and Steiner elements. On March 3, 1752 they appeal to the coetus to do something, as Schlatter had given them a release before Leydich and Lischy, and agreed by his own hand before he left for THE RUBEL CONTROVERSY. 413 Europe, and they were free now to act as seemed wisest for their interests. And as Steiner had also left, they feel that the time had come for some effort to unite them. Leydich says that the school-master of the old congregation on May 24 prepared a document for uniting the Schlatter and the Steiner parties. Steiner's congregation had been without a pastor for four months. So six from each party met and made an agreement, July 12, which was also signed by eighty-eight names. They united in the plan that it would be to the interest of peace to call an entirely new man. To do this they would choose from among the six ministers who were coming. Thus it was hoped the Steiner faction would be brought back to the church. As soon therefore as the new ministers arrived, the congrega- tion had each of them preach, one after the other, Frank- enfeld preaching last. They chose Rubel. This was not, however, to the minds of the Reformed ministers. For Weiss and Leydich had been made acquainted with the situation as soon as Schlatter arrived. They decided that no action should be taken until the coetus met. All this was a bitter disappointment to Schlatter. Rubel had already shown an independent spirit, even while on ship- board. He was just the one of the six young men most apt to act independently of Schlatter. And so the old dis- sension in Philadelphia was again revived. Rubel at the request of his consistory began (August 19) quite a correspondence with Lischy about his troubles. 414 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. He wrote to him asking him how to appoint delegates to the next coetiis, and how to supply them with proper cre- dentials, for he said he and his congregation had no desire to cease being subject to the Holland deputies. Lischy replied to this letter quite severely. He took especial exception to the phrase used by Rubel in his letter, that his congregation would be true to the Holland fathers " as far as they were Christian," thus giving the inference that some of their regulations might not be Christian. Lischy said he would refer Rubel's letter to the coming coetus. Rubel also wrote to Holland to Rev. Mr. Kessler defend- ing his actions. Weiss, too, seemed greatly exercised about the state of affairs. He wrote to Holland, October 14, enclosing a draft of a church constitution having some very excellent points about it. It gave greater liberty to the congrega- tion over against the central authority in the coetus. It recognized the Heidelberg Catechism, the Canons of Dort and the authority of Holland, and thus revealed Weiss' theological ideas in regard to predestination and church constitution. His constitution was, however, not adopted by the deputies. The Boehm constitution, which had been adopted by the coetus of 1748, was found to be inade- quate, because it was originally intended only for a con- gregation, and had originally no reference to a synod. It never was adopted by the Holland Churcli, and grad- ually fell into disuse, Weiss' constitution is clearer and THE RUBEL CONTROVERSY. 415 simpler thau Boehm's, aud better intended for a synod. The Holland authorities replied to Weiss that they knew I no better Church constitution than that of the Reformed : Church of the Netherlands. And this thus became the authoritative guide of the Pennsylvania coetus. Leydich also showed great anxiety about the state of affairs. In a letter to Lischy (September 2) as to the coming coetus he tells how anxious he is to know whether elders would be admitted or excluded from coetus. He wanted them to be present. Schlatter was opposed to admitting elders, and in his defence quoted a letter from deputy Hoede- maker, which said that coetus should consist only of min- isters. This Hoedemaker said was the custom in Ger- many. (But such was not the custom in Holland, as Schlatter soon found out from the deputies.) Hoedemaker, however, died before it could be found out what he had said. The coetus met at Lancaster, October 18, 1752. It opened auspiciously. First of all Rieger, who had been invited to the coetus by Weiss and Leydich, was, after apologising to Schlatter, reconciled to him, and promised aijain to live and believe according; to the doctrine of the Heidelberg Catechism and the Canons of Dort. The first business of the coetus was the subscription to the Heidel- berg Catechism and the Canons of Dort. All signed, even Rieger, who had protested at the coetus of 1748. The coetus not only included the former members, Weiss, 416 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. Schlatter, Rieger and Leydich, but also five of the young men from Europe, Stoy, Otterbein, Wissler, Frankenfeld and Waldschmidt. To these were added Lischy and also Du Bois and Tenipelman, the last two candidates for the ministry. Du Bois and Tempelman were ordained during the sessions of the coetus on October 21. Weiss, as the oldest minister, acted as president at the opening session. At the election of officers Schlatter was unanimously elected president, Weiss vice president and Leydich clerk. Ley- dich, however, declined the position, giving as a reason that he could not sit long enough. (This was probably only a feint, for he was dissatisfied that no elders were allowed to take part in the coetus.) So Stoy was chosen clerk. Rubel appeared with two of his members from Philadelphia and caused an uproar. He openly objected to the election of Schlatter as president, as he was not the pastor of any charge, and therefore had no rights in the coetus. When this question came up for decision, the coetus decided against Rubel to sustain Schlatter. But the vote was not unanimous, for Weiss immediately left the coetus, together with his elder, followed by Leydich and Wissler, together with their elders. It seems that another difficulty had come up in addition to the one about the rights of the elders in the coetus, namely the supremacy of Sciilatter. Rubel in a letter to liischy voiced the fear that Schlatter had been given an authority like that of a superiuteudent oyer the other niin- THE RUBEL CONTROVERSY. 417 isters, and had the right to appoint pastors as he willed. Rubel says that Mr. Schleydorn, Schlatter's father-in-law, had told him so. If this was true, it was only a little gos- sip. There was no word of truth in it. The Holland deputies never gave any special authority to Schlatter to be superintendent or to have any authority above his brethren. These two questions, the rights of the elders in .- ) voting in the coetus and the supreme authority of Schlat- ) ter, divided the coetus, as four of the ministers and their elders, Weiss, Rubel, Wissler and Leydich, went away. The rest, the majority, however remained and held the coetus. It was by far the largest coetus yet held, in spite of the loss of those just named. Quite a number of elders were present, but were allowed no vote. On Thursday, the 19th, Schlatter opened the coetus with a sermon on Haggai 1 : 14. First the instructions of the Holland deputies were read. Schlatter described the great benevolence of the Holland fathers. He reported that the Holland synods had sent 800 unbound Bibles and also 500 folio Bibles, printed at Basle in 1747, one of which should be placed on the pulpit of each church belonging to the coetus. A vote of thanks was passed to the Holland synods, the classis and consistory of Amster- dam, the Evangelical Assembly of Switzerland and the upper consistory of the Palatinate for their interest and donations. Complaint was brought in against Lischy by some of his congregation at York, and a committee of two 27 418 THE GERMAN EEFOEMED CHURCH IN U. S. ministers was appointed to visit them. Steiner wrote a letter to the coetus containing complaints against Schlat^ ter, but the coetus promptly decided that the Steiner- Schlatter controversy had been closed, and they would not reopen it. Rieger was appointed to answer Steiner's let- ter. A letter from thirty members of the congregation at Philadelphia Avas read, asking for religious services, as they would have nothing to do with Rubel. Coetus asked them to wait until spring. The coetus lasted six days and closed ^^dth a thanksgiving sermon by Waldschmidt, Tuesday, October 4. But they did not wait until spring to decide on the request from Philadelphia. After the coetus Schlatter took the trouble to visit Weiss and Leydich, and asked them to subscribe to the coetus' minutes, but they refused. It was then decided to hold an extra coetus. A special 1 meeting of the coetus was held, December 1 2, at Schlat- ter's house in Philadelphia, to act on this matter. It decided that Schlatter should begin at once to hold servi- ces in Philadelphia. The two Presbyterian ministers offered him their churches. Stoy and Rieger preaclied the opening sermons. Schlatter continued these services, holding them in the English Academy (a building origi- nally built for Whitefield), but his congregations were small. He also suj)plicd the small congregation at Wit- pen, left vacant by Brehm. He was thus true to his promise to Boehm, that that congregation should not be THE RUBEL CONTROVERSY. 419 forsaken after his death. He also supplied the congrega- tion at Amwell, New Jersey. The next coetus Schlatter intended holding at Read- ing in April^ 1753, and he invited Weiss, Kubel, Steiner, Leydich and Wissler to it. It was, however, held at Lan- caster, instead of Reading, because some of the ministers preferred it. Schlatter suggested that they elect another president, but they insisted on his election. The main business of this meeting was the apportionment of the Holland donations of 1 1009. 20. The coetus left $144 in the hands of Schlatter, to be divided among Weiss, Ley- dich and Wissler, who were absent from the meeting. Schlatter had had printed at his owii expense 1000 ABC books. He was ordered to publish a small catechism for the youth. Weiss and Leydich signed the coetus' acts on May 29, 1753, in the presence of DuBois, when Schlatter gave them a share in the donations, amounting to $48 each. They had signed the coetus' acts of 1752 on May 1, 1753. On December 3, 1752, Rubel wrote an appeal to the deputies, stating that he and his congregation would be satisfied with their decision. After the special coetus two events occurred to still further widen the breach between the Weiss and the Schlatter parties. One was that a letter was received from Holland, ordering that none of the Holland donations should be paid out to any one who had left the coetus. A few days after receiving it, Leydich came to Philadelphia 420 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. and claimed that he ought to have received $46.80 more than he had received. Schlatter, on the authority of the message from Holland, refused to pay it, as Leydich had left the coetus. Another event also occurred, which was unfortunate at that time. One of the Holland letters addressed to Ley- dich, that passed through Schlatter's hands, happened to have been opened. Leydich decided that Schlatter had opened the letter. He became suspicious of a new usur- pation on the part of Schlatter. This letter, Leydich claimed, gave him authority to call a coetus meeting, in spite of Schlatter. So it became a question which party was legally the coetus. Weiss and he arranged for a spe- cial meeting of the coetus at Goshenhoppen on Monday, September 10. Schlatter went to it and was surprised to find there only Weiss, Leydich, Eubel and AValdschmidt. When Schlatter asked where DuBois was, Leydich said that they had forgotten to notify him. Steiner and Rubel came each with two elders and twenty-four strange elders or farmers. Schlatter then charged Weiss with issuing the notice of the meeting too late for his friends, who lived at a great distance to get to it in time. Thus the meeting was made up mainly of Schlatter's enemies, while his friends had not yet arrived. Rubel began severely attack- ing Schlatter. Schlatter at once protested against the meeting of the coetus as being irregular for a number of reasons : THE RUBEL CONTROVERSY. 421 1. A majority of the coetus was not present, there being only five ministers in attendance. 2. It was contrary to all classical or synodical order, as there were more elders present than ministers, who had a vote in its session. 3. Several of the ministers present who did not regu- larly belong to the coetns, namely Rubel and Steiner, were allowed to take part as members. He also gave other reasons why this could not be a regular meeting of a coetus, as there was no prayer at its beginning, nor was there a sermon preached, as was cus- tomary ; no president or secretary was chosen, nor were any credentials asked for ; there was no business done, except the reading of the letter from the deputies to Ley- dich. After Schlatter had stayed two or three hours, he, together with Stoy, started for home, but before leaving he arranged with Stoy, Frankenfeld, Tempelman and Wiss- ler (the latter arriving just as he left) to hold the annual coetus at the usual time at Lancaster, September 25. They asked Leydich for his letter from Holland, so that they might communicate it to the absent members, Rieger, Lischy, Otterbein and DuBois, but he refused to give it. After Schlatter left, the Weiss party organized. They elected Weiss president and appointed a meeting of coetus at Cocalico, ten miles from Lancaster, two weeks from that date, and before Schlatter's coetus would convene at Lancaster. As a result there was considerable corre- 422 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. spoudence, which caused that neither coetiis was licld at the date named, but later. Schlatter invited Weiss and Leydieh to come to Lancaster, September 25. Otterbein wrote to Weiss that iu order to prevent schism, they were willing to go to Cocalico, but under the following condi- tions : 1. That it bo more orderly than the coetus at Goshenhoppen. 2. Tluit Weiss be not regarded as presi- dent. 3. That Rubel and so many elders be not admit- ted. 4. That the ministers should become united before- hand. But since it appeared from a letter from Weiss and others that these conditions would not be complied with, the negotiations belated the meeting, so that it could not be held until October 9. When the Schlatter party gathered at Lancaster, Octo- ber 9, a deiMitation, consisting of Lischy, Otterbein and Stoy, together with two calm elders, were sent to Cocalico, where the other coetus v/as meeting, to invite them to come to Lancaster. This committee went there, but reported that they were treated coldly. So they returned, reporting that Rubel and thirty or more elders made so much of an u[)roar that they could not speak to any min- ister in private. Tliey reported that Weiss, Steiner and Rubel were present with a number of elders. After the return of this deputation, it was discussed whether they should adjourn to Cocalico, but it was unanimously decided not to go. So they held their own meeting at Lancaster. Thus the coetus was split into two very nearly equal THE RUBEL CONTROVERSY. 423 parts. The Schlatter party assembled in regular coetus at Lancaster, October 9. Rieger was made president and Otterbein clerk. Its minutes are filled with complaints to the Holland deputies against Weiss, Leydich, Wald- schmidt, Wissler and Fraukenfeld, the other party. They decided to lay the whole matter clearly before the Church in Holland. They speak of the mischief that the Hol- land letter to Leydich has done. For the other party claim that in it they have orders from Holland which the Schlatter party do not have, and therefore they, and not Schlatter, are recognized by Holland. The climax of the session came when Schlatter asked to be dismissed from the coetus, because of the criticisms by the deputies on his work. This was very reluctantly granted, as they feared the consequences of his dismissal on the coetus and the Pennsylvania Church in general. Schlatter also asked to be relieved of receiving the Holland donations. Having dismissed Schlatter, they pass laudatory resolutions about him and exonerate him from all charges. They ask the privilege of excluding elders from the coetus' meetings, because of the expense it causes the coetus, and also because the elders hear things in coetus that they carry back to the congregations, and thus cause trouble, espe- cially if there be a case of discipline of a minister. They agree to submit to whatever decision the Holland deputies may make in the matter, and in the meantime no coetus shall be held. 424 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S, Meanwhile the rival coetus was held at Cocalico, Octo- ber 10-12. Weiss, the president, preached "the opening sermon on 1 Peter 2 : 5. Rubel says in a letter that the ministers present were Weiss, Leydich, Steiner, Wald- schmidt, Frankenfeld, Wissler, Tempelraan and Rubel, but there must be some mistake. Tempelman was at the other coetus, and the minutes are signed by only Weiss, Leydich, Waldschmidt and Wissler. Deputies' acts, March 19, 1754, speak of all present but Tempelman. Still Rubel may be right. If so it is a formidable coetus against Schlatter, for it had more than a majority of the Reformed ministers in Pennsylvania. The first business was the hearing of reports from the congregation at Phil- adelphia. Germantown requested to be received iuto the coetus. It ordered $80 of the Reiff money in the hands of Schlatter to be divided between Germantown and Skip- pack congregations. Steiner was appointed to preacii at Providence alternately with Leydich, so that they might have a service every tw^o weeks. Leydich and Steiner were also appointed to supply the congregations across the Schuylkill (Chester county). Waldschmidt was ordered to supply Reyer's congregation and White Oaks. Freder- ick Casimir Miller asked to be admitted to the coetus. It is to the credit of the coetus that it did yet acquiesce in this request, because of the offensiveness of his conduct, and that they refused unanimously. Lischy's opponents at York appealed to this coetus, thinking that as Schlatter, THE RUBEL CONTROVERSY. 425 who had always shielded Lischy, had no control here, they might gain redress. The coetus acted favorably on their petition, and ordered Tempelman and Waldschmidt to go to York and moderate an election. (Spangler, the com- plainant, says that they went to York and conducted an election, October 17. Frankenfeld received the majority of votes. A call was sent to him, which he accepted in a letter, but he never came, and nothing came of the attempt. Spangler suggests that Frankenfeld wanted to arrange an exchange of congregations with Lischy, but Frederick would not take Lischy, and so the project fell through.) The coetus also allotted the Holland money to the minis- ters. They complain against Schlatter's action at Goshen- hoppen, where Schlatter had objected to their coetus and tried to get the letters of the synods from Leydich by force, but was prevented. They charge Schlatter with lording it over the Church and seeking rather his glory than that of the Church. They complain of Schlatter opening their letters, and ask the deputies to send the letters not through Schlatter, but through DuBois, of New York, or through the merchants, Messrs. Shoemaker, of Philadelphia. The minutes are signed by Weiss, president ; Leydich, clerk ; Waldschmidt and Wissler, and also by four elders, one each from Falkner Swamp, Providence, Philadelphia and Germantown. As a result of this coetus, Rubel was installed pastor of the Philadelphia congregation, Novem- ber 18, 1753, by Weiss and Leydich. Thus the coetus was rent in twain. 426 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. Meanwhile the deputies had heard of the unfortunate state of affairs among the brethren of the coetus. They were at first surprised at getting no tidings from Schlatter for so long a time. And they were the more awkwardly '^' placed, because Schlatter's opponents were repeatedly giv- ing the full particulars against Schlatter. Weiss and Leydich both write, Weiss giving a full description of the trouble as it began at Philadelphia. Steiner also wrote, trying to assist Rubel, and, in addition to his letters, sent newspapers reflecting severely on Schlatter. For this kind of action the deputies severely reply to him. Rubel also wrote, but to Kessler rather than to the deputies, although all these letters were read to the deputies. They therefore wrote to Schlatter, expressing themselves very much displeased with his want of correspondence, espe- cially as his opponents were writing so frequently. Schlat- ter, perhaps, felt that there was nothing to write, because so much was going wrong in Pennsylvania. But his neg- ligence prejudiced his case against him in Holland. When the deputies wrote to Schlatter, April 2, 1753, they rebuke him that from September, when he wrote to them about his safe arrival in America with the six young ministers, up to that time they had not received any word from liiin. They criticise him for not acting wisely in his manage- ment of the Pennsylvania churches. They also speak of the charges brought against him. They find fault with him about the release he gave to the Philadelj)hia congre- THE RUBET. CONTROVERSY. 427 gation, of which they had learned only through his oppo- nents ; and they want to know the reason why he had never mentioned it during his stay with them in Holland. The deputies had discussed his case at their meeting of March 13, 1753. About his refusal to admit elders to the coetus, and his acceptance of the presidency of the coetus, for which his opponents charged him with wanting to be permanent president, on these points the deputies had decided against him. They suggest that he accept a charge in Virginia, rather than be a superintendent. By the fall of 1753, however, the deputies begin to get a large correspondence. They had been complaining for so many years (since 1731) that they had not been receiving letters enough from Pennsylvania, and were not able to get sufficient information. Now they get all the information they want, and more than they desire. They were flooded with letters, as Schlatter also, as well as his opponents, begins writing. The period of 1753-1754 is the most prolific in the Holland correspondence. Schlatter writes to them, August 20, 1753. He claims that he had written a number of letters. He attempts to explain away his concealment in Holland of the release he gave to the Pliiladelphia congregation in 1751. He says that he did not deem it necessary to mention it in Holland, as he had so many other testimonials, which he brought with him from Pennsylvania, and because he thought the matter would blow over by the time he 428 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. returned. In regard to the 80 dollars of the ReiflF money, which his opponents charged him with keeping, and which the deputies ordered him to divide between the churches at Germantown and Skippack, he replied that the deputies had already ordered him to use part of it for traveling expenses, and also for the salaries of the school- masters. He said that he was willing to pay the money to Germantown, although it had so unkindly treated him ; and as Skippack had gone to nothing, he desired farther instructions from the deputies, to know what was to be done with their share of the money. We must confess that about his release to the Phila- delphia congregation Schlatter's defense seems weak. It was his duty, as their agent in Pennsylvania, to make known to them everything. But in regard to the Reiff money Schlatter was riglit. The deputies had forgotten their previous orders to him. In regard to the third charge against him, that he refused to allow elders in the coetus, he enclosed a letter of deputy Hoedemaker, in which he gives it as his opinion that elders should not be admitted to the coetus. Still, Schlatter never should have accepted Hoedemaker's individual opinion alone, but should have waited for deputies to have acted on so important a matter. In regard to the fourth charge, that he allowed liiniself to be made presid(>nt, and sought to be a superintendent over the brethren, lie denied it and stated that he had been elected unanimously by the coetus. He THE RUBEL CONTROVEESY. 429 complained in his letter that the deputies had condemned him unheard, and asks for a lenient judgment. He also tells them that such troubles as the Reformed were pass- ing through, were the common lot of every denomination in this new world ; that the Lutherans had their quarrels under Muhlenberg, as at Gerraantown. And we might add, the Presbyterians too had had theirs about the fol- lowers of Whitefield, The deputies, in their correspondence, find fault with the Pennsylvania ministers, that after the Holland gov- ernment and churches had given such large donations to their work, they should allow themselves to get into such a dissension. Lischy too on November 8, 1753, wrote a letter of deep humiliation to the deputies, regretting their unfortunate divisions as a poor return for their kindness. But matters, by the fall of 1753, had come to their extremest pass. The coetus had split into two parts, a sad sight for so small and so young a body. Matters could go no farther. The time had come for a return to unity. Only a month passed after the rival coetus had met, October, 1753, when a most unexpected thing took place. Schlatter and Steiner became reconciled, Novem- ber 15, 1753, in the presence of Otterbein, Lischy and DuBois at Philadelphia. Steiner then declared his wil- lingness to be subordinate to the Holland Church. (This is another event that disproves the theory that Steiner and the Philadelphia congregation left the coetus, because 430 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. they did not want to be subordinate to the Holland Church and its high Calvinism. If there had been anything true in that reason, Steiner never would have come from Holland. For before the deputies he, like all the others, had to sign his adherence to the Dutch creeds, including the Canons of Dort.) He now returns to what he agreed to the deputies, namely subordination to Hol- land and adherence to their Calvinistic creeds. So peace came between the Weiss and Schlatter parties. And Rubel was the only one left outside of the coetus. Rubel, in writing to the deputies, November 26, 1753, bitterly com- plained about the reconciliation of Steiner with Schlatter, and said Steiner did it because he needed to get money from Schlatter to pay his debts. And the next meetings of coetus, 1754 and 1755, were pervaded with the spirit of fellowship and union. In the meanwhile Schlatter went to Europe, having resigned from the coetus. About a week after the recon- ciliation, the coetus, at a special meeting, gave him his dismissal to go to Europe. Before starting for Europe he presented a series of questions to the ministers, such as he would be likely to be asked by the deputies when he arrived in Holland. These exonerated him and put the blame of the troubles on Weiss and Leydich. These answers were signed by Stoy, Steiner, Lischy, Ottcrbein, DuBois and Tempelman. He also, as on his first return, bore testimonials from Mr. Peters, secretary of the colony THE RUBEL CONTROVERSY. 431 from Gilbert Tennant and Samuel Davies, Presbyterian ministers of Philadelphia. Tennant and Davies, who were in Loudon, both wrote to Holland, defending Schlat- ter's course. They say they do this, because of the spirit of independency in all the churches in Pennsylvania. The Holland deputies accepted Schlatter's final dismissal, and also dismissed Rubel, as he, in a letter of November 26, 1753, said that the Germans in the city of New York had been making overtures to him toward organizing a con- gregation there. On December 6, 1753, Rubel says he has a call to New York and will probably preach there in three weeks. The deputies take him at his word and dismiss him from their employ, but they never recognized him as pastor of the Philadelphia congregation, as they claimed that the Cocalico coetus of 1753, which confirmed his call to that church, was not a regular coetus, and its acts were illegal. Schlatter, when he returned to Philadel- phia in 1754, brought with him Rubel's dismissal. The -,^f ^\,- coetus, which met on his return, October 30, 1754, sum- moned Rubel to appear before them to hear the decision of the Holland deputies. He did not come, but two of his elders appeared. Rubel was very greatly disappointed at the dismissal and rued bargain. He writes to the Hol- land deputies (December 20, 1754) that he had not desired the dismissal when he made the request, but he submitted to it, saying, however, that he ought not to be deprived of the Holland donations, Rubel, however, refused to 432 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. leave the Church, because he claimed that his agreement with the Philadelphia congregation required him to receive six months' notice before he was dismissed. He said that he had been promised sixty pounds a year, and already half a year had gone by; so as the contract was made with the congregation by the year, he must get his whole year's salary, and after that he would preach his farewell sermon. This action of Rubel in refusing to leave Philadelphia till his six months' salary was paid, complicated and delayed matters. And the whole matter was still further complicated by the action of the deputies. At their ses- sion of April 2, 1755, they find fault with the coetus that Rubel has been deprived of the Holland donations. As he was in the service of the Pennsylvania churches, they say, he ought to have had 200 gulden each year in 1753 and 1754. Yet the deputies had ordered that after Octo- ber 9, 1 754, Rubel should not have a share. The coetus of 1755 ordered Rubel to preach his farewell sermon on April 26, and ordered the Philadelphia congregation to pay him his half year's salary, as stipulated in the call. Rubel left Philadelphia, but he did not go to New York city to take charge of the congregation there, as he had suggested to the deputies. No wonder he was sorry that the deputies gave him his dismission, because his going to New York proved to have nothing in it. He went to Camp and Rhinebeck, up the Hudson, where THE RUBEL CONTROVERSY. 433 Weiss had formerly preached for a time, where he says his congregation gave him eighty pounds. He wrote to olassis, May 12, 1756, thanking them that they had ordered him to be given 400 gulden, but says he had not yet received any of it from the coetus. A month later he seems to have gone back to Philadelphia to the meeting of coetus, so as to get his 400 gulden. But the coetus was greatly grieved and objected strongly to it, and wrote to the Hol- land deputies, reminding them that they had by their action contradicted their previous action of 1753. And they report to the deputies thatRubel had been given 100 florins in 1752 and in 1753 to supply deficit in his salary. When the classical commissioners heard of this from the coetus, they acknowledged their error, and say they could wish that the previous action giving Rubel had not been adopted, but it was difficult to go back on the previous action. They suggested that the coetus could pay it off by giving Rubel 100 gulden a year, provided that the church at Philadelphia first gave its 100 gulden. The matter was finally fixed up by the deputies giving 200 gulden, and the coetus and Philadelphia the rest. Thus the Rubel matter was finally closed after being long drawn out and causing perpetual complications. The deputies had been the more anxious to get rid of Rubel, because in a packet of letters received by the deputies, October 29, 1 753, was a letter that had been broken open. In it Rubel wrote to his parents about a 434 THE GEEMAN EEFOEMED CHUECH IN U. S. candidate for the miDistiy, named Vernes, at SoHngen, urging him to come to Pennsylvania, and suggesting that he get the Holland deputies to pay his traveling expenses ; or if they would not do it, he could raise the money by taking up collections on the way. The deputies thus learned that it was the ambition of Rubel to start and build up another coetus by the side of their coetus. Ru- bel already had had a candidate for the minis^try from Hanau, named Lapp, assisting him, who had been called to Amwell, N. J., and if he could induce a few more min- isters to come over to Pennsylvania, he would be able to form a coetus. The deputies took alarm at this project, which thus leaked out by chance. And when Vernes wrote to them, asking to be sent to Pennsylvania and given his traveling expenses, he did not get much encour- agement. Of the later career of Rubel, Rev. Dr. Corwin says in his " Historic Manual of the Reformed Church" that he became pastor on Long Island at Brooklyn and adjacent congregations, 1759-1783. He there became a strong adherent to the Holland party belonging to the confereu- tie, which subordinated itself to Holland over against the classis, which was independent of Holland. He became a violent tory in the revolution, calling the American sol- diers "Satan's soldiers," and denounced them from the pulpit frequently. He was deposed from the ministry in 1784 and died in 1797. CHAPTER IV.— SECTION IX. SCHLATTER AND THE CHARITY SCHOOLS. Schlatter returned from Europe to America, October 30, 1754. He assembled his brethren at his house in Philadelphia for a coetus meeting. It was decided not to call it a regular meeting of coetus, as no elders were pres- ent. The letters of the deputies were first read. Schlat- ter presented his dismissal from the coetus given him by the deputies, and took his leave. But although there had been dissensions among the members of the coetus about him, it unanimously resolved that he should be again admitted as a member of the coetus. He returned, there- fore, thanking them for their confidence in him and expressing the hope that he might be able to advance the welfare of the Church in Pennsylvania. It was resolved to hold a regular meeting of the coetus on April 9, 1755, at Lancaster, for which Weiss was appointed president, Leydich vice-president, and Rieger secretary. Weiss agreed to open the coetus with a sermon, and Rieger to close it in the same way. Thus peace reigned, instead of the dissensions of the previous year. Schlatter now entered on his work for the charity tchools, This scheme had a very interesting history. 436 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. When Schlatter visited Amsterdam in 1752, he created a considerable interest in the Pennsylvania Germans. The English Reformed congregation at Amsterdam had then as its pastors David Longueville and David Thomson. The former was an intimate friend of Philip Doddridge. He died in 1770, after a pastorate of thirty years, very highly honored. He frequently served as a commissioner of the classis on Pennsylvania affairs. But it was espe- cially his colleague, David Thomson, who became so inter- ested that he gave up his time and labored so earnestly for the Pennsylvania Germans. He had come from Ayr- shire, Scotland, the beautiful home of Burns, after gradu- ating in the university of Glasgow, and had been installed as second pastor of this English Reformed cougregation at Amsterdam on December 16, 1742. Having learned from Schlatter of the destitute condition of the Germans in Pennsylvania, he requested of the classis of Amsterdam permission to go to England to lay the matter before the British people. It seems strange at first that he should undertake so difficult a work. They were of a different race and spoke a different language. But, although he lived in Holland, he was a true Briton boru and felt that his native country did not sufficiently appreciate the needs or the value of these Germans so as to make them good citi- zens. He determined to give up his time and his salary, and at his own expense go to England to plead their cause before the English people. The classis^, March 1, 1752, gave him SCHLATTER AND THE CHARITY SCHOOLS. 437 credentials stating the object of his work, and also describ- ing what the Dutch had done in sending men and money to Pennsylvania. Thomson's consistory generously granted him permission to go, but asked that he send a supply to minister to them in his absence. This he did by sending to them Rev. Samuel Beldam from England. Before he left Holland, he had a conference with the English minis- ter, the Duke of York, and also had an audience with the Queen of Holland. So with recommendations from the deputies at the Hague, from the classis of Amsterdam, the classical com- missioners, and also from the English Reformed consis- tory at Amsterdam, he set out on liis mission. He left Rotterdam, March 6. When he arrived at Loudon, he first addressed himself to the Presbyterian ministers there. He was received with the greatest cordiality. As the king of England was absent, visitiug his European prov- inces in Hanover, Germany, and the parliament had been dissolved, nothing could then be done. He decided it best to go to Scotland and lay the Pennsylvania churches before the General Assembly of the Scotch Reformed Church. He went, taking with him the recommendations previously mentioned, to Avhich he added recommenda- tions from several members of parliament and from the leading London ministers. The General Assembly met at Edinburgh, May 14, 1752. The Scotch Church (now called Presbyterian) was 438 THE GERMAN EEPORMED CHURCH IN U. S. not unfamiliar with the German Reformed, for one of its earliest catechisms had been the Heidelberg Catechism. The General Assembly approved of the scheme to aid the Germans, and ordered a collection to be taken up in all its churches on December 2, 1752. At the next General Assembly of 1753, Rev. Patrick Cuming, D. D., the last president, reported that he had written a letter to Rev. Samuel Chandler, of London, suggesting that the best method to aid the Germans was by founding schools among them. The assembly ordered that all the money raised by the churches should be paid to Chandler and his society, and appointed a committee, consisting of all the ministers of Edinboro, the Earl of Dumfries, the Lord Justice Clark, Provost Drummond and several other gen- tlemen, to correspond with the Charity Society, which had been founded in London. The amount collected by the Scotch churches was repoiled in 1754 to the General As- sembly to have been $5702.47. The last mention of Pennsylvania in the minutes of the General Assembly was in 1759, when Rev. David Thomson, liaving returned from Holland to take a pastorate at Gargunnock in Scot- land, made a report that the society had been laboring for eight years, and that a coetus or presbytery had been organized, consisting of fourteen ministers and six or seven schools. The assembly again approved of the move- ment. Returning to Thomson, we find that after he had laid SCHLATTER AND THE CHARITY SCHOOLS. 439 the project before the Scotch General Assembly in May, 1752, he returned to London. At the suggestion of the London ministers he addressed himself to the Archbishop of Canterbury, who showed great interest, and promised to lay the matter before the king and to ask help for the Palatines for a number of years. Thomson also laid the matter before others of the nobility, especially the Earl of Granville, who advised him to address himself to the pro- visional government, which acted in the absence of the king. Thomson appeared before this council of the king and was received in a very friendly manner. He appeared before them a second time, but they told him that nothing coidd be done until the king returned. Meanwhile Thom- son was busy agitating the matter and succeeded in organ- izing a Charity society, called " The Society for the Propo- gation of the Knowledge of God among the Germans." This had a committee of fourteen gentlemen, consisting of the Earl of Shaftesbury, Lord Willoughby of Parham, Sir Luke Schaub, Sir Josiah Van Neck, Thomas Chittey, esq., TJiomas Fluddyer, alderman of London, Benjamin Avery, LL. D., James Vernon, esq., John Bance, esq., Robert Ferguson, esq., Nathaniel Price, Rev. Dr. Birch, Rev. Casper Wetstein, Rev. David Thomson and Rev. Samuel Chandler. Its president was Lord Willoughby of Par- ham, and its secretary Rev. Samuel Chandler. Mr. Chandler, the secretary, deserves especial mention for his continuous and self-denying labors for the Germans 440 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. of Pennsylvania. He was a Presbyterian clergyman, born at Hungerford, Berkshire county, 1693. He began to preach in July, 1714, and his first pastorate was at Peckhamville. The loss of his wife's fortune in the South Sea scheme compelled him to open a bookstore and enter the field of literature. While he was at Peckham, a course of lectures in defense of Christianity was inaugurated in the Presby- terian church at Old Jewry, London, aud he was appointed one of the lecturers. His rising reputation led him to be called to that church first as assistant pastor in 1726, aud two years later as pastor. He remained there as pastor for forty years, and became one of the most prominent Presbyterian clergymen of London. He was in the front of a number of the philanthropic movements of his day, as of the " fund for widows and orphans of dissenting min- isters." His warm heart quickly responded to Thomson's appeal for the shepherdless Germans of Pennsylvania. Pie was an able apologist and poleniist, a liberal Calvinist, and though repeatedly offered places in the Episcopal Church, ho declined. The universities of Edinboro and Aberdeen both gave him the title of doctor of divinity. He died in 1766, aged 73 years. Benjamin Avery was another prominent and active member of this charity society. He was at first also a Presbyterian minister, but left the ministry and became one of the leading physicians of London. Whenever Chandler appeared before the king's council to ask for SCHLATTER AND THE CHARITY SCHOOLS. 441 mouey for the Pennsylvania Germans, Avery was the one who generally accompanied him. Another prominent member of this society was Rev. Casper Wetstein, who was the court chaplain of the princess of Wales and seems to have been a prominent Episcopal clergyman. This list of members presents a combination of noble- men and politicians joined with ministers and philan- thropically inclined persons. For this society appealed to the English people in two ways : A. Politically. The danger was pointed out that these Germans, being a continental nation, might join with the French in America in the event of a war between France and England. And as they composed the great biilk of the population in Pennsylvania, England would be apt to lose Pennsylvania, one of her most promising colonies, and her central colony ; which, if captured by the enemy, would hopelessly divide the other colonies.* This argument very powerfully impressed the nobles and statesmen of England, and finally made the king take the Charity school scheme under his care. B. Religiously. It appealed to the English people from a religious point of view. Here were thousands of Germans in one of their provinces, who were almost with- out ministers, and to a large extent without schools. It was important not only that they should be made good * Thej did not know that the Germans would never join the French on account of the bitter prejudice of these German Palatines against the French, because the latter has so terribly devastated their land for many years. 442 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. citizens, but that they should be supplied with pastors and schools, so that their souls might be saved. As Thomson found that he could not finish his work in England before his leave of absence from his congrega- tion expired, he wrote to them, August 18, 1752, asking that it be extended. Accompanying this letter was also a letter from five of the leading pastors of London, George Benson, D. D., John Allen, John Milner, D. D., Nathan- iel Lardner, D, D., and Samuel Chandler, showing the necessity of his remaining in London until the king returned from the continent. Thomson's congregation very kindly gave him permission, September, 1752, to remain longer, but asked him to send a minister to tem- porarily take his place, as Beldam had returned to Eng- land. The newly organized society then determined to present a request to the king, asking his consent to take up a collection throughout his kingdom. Thomson, with two of the nobles, advocated this before Pelham, the chancellor of the exchequer. He, however, urged a better plan, namely to name some specific amount, as 500 pounds, that might be given them, rather than a general collection. The Duke of Newcastle, secretary of state, and Milford Holfernes, secretary of the American colonies, and also the Count of Halifax, all approved most heartily of the scheme. But by February 1, 1753, the congregation at Amster- dam requested Thomson's return home, as he had not been SCHLATTER AND THE CHARITY SCHOOLS. 443 able to seud them a supply in his place. The Charity society sent a letter to thein, pleading for his stay in Lon- don a few weeks more, as matters were coming to a crisis owing to the near return of the king. The consistory of the Amsterdam church granted him six weeks longer absence, as they were not willing that an affair of such great importance should suffer through his absence from London. Our denomination owes a great debt of grati- tude to the English Reformed church of Amsterdam for its interest and unselfishness in granting its pastor so long an absence to labor for us in England. By May 6 Thom- son had returned to Amsterdam, where he reported to classis and to his congregation the success of his labors. David Thomson should ever live in the memory of the Reformed Church of the United States for his broad, gen- erous, hearty advocacy before the English people of the needs of our German forefathers. He sacrificed time and money, without hope of any return for it. Thomson remained as pastor of the English Reformed church at Amsterdam till 1758, when he went to Scot- land, where he became pastor at Gargunnock, and after- wards at St. Ninian's in Stirling, where he died and was buried. He was succeeded at Amsterdam by Rev. James Blinshall, of Islington, London, who also showed great interest in the Germans of Pennsylvania and served as a commissioner of the classis on Pennsylvania affairs. The classis of Amsterdam and the consistory, together with the 444 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. deputies of North and South Holland synods, aftenvard made good his traveling expenses, which amounted to $328. Although Thomson had returned from England, the work was continued by the newly formed society. On July 20, 1753, Chandler wrote to Thomson that a number more of the lords were willing to add their names to the petition to the king. The Archbishop of York also endorsed the movement. The petition was presented to the king by Chandler, but he found that ten Aveeks would elapse before an answer would be given. Then Pelham went away from London to the English watering place at Scarborough, and this still further delayed the matter. Finally, on October 23, 1753, Chandler wrote to Thomson the joyful news that he had at last been successful, and that the king had promised |5000, of which $3000 were to be paid in November and the remainder later, (The tradition in our Church of an invested fund of $100,000, whose interest was to be used for the Pennsylvania schools, turns out to be a myth.) The society seems to have received little more money than was received from the Scotch churches and from the king. On December 1, 1753, the society came into contact with Rev. Dr. William Smith, one of the leading men of Pennsylvania and the head of the University of Pennsyl- vania at Philadelphia, who was in London. He heartily approved their scheme, and proved of great assistance to SCHLATTER AND THE CHARITY SCHOOLS. 445 them because of bis intimate knowledge with Pennsylva- nia aifairs. He wrote a long appeal, December 13, which was presented to the king by the Archbishop of Canter- bury. The Society also published a brief one-paged sheet, giving a description of the needs of the Germans and a plan of the English schools to be established among them. (The statement that Schlatter's appeal was translated into English does not seem to be borne out. This one-paged tract, however, was based on Schlatter's appeal.) Meanwhile another Pennsylvanian arrived in London, E,ev. Michael Schlatter, the man of whose labors they had heard so much from Thomson, and to whom their pub- lished description referred. Schlatter was in London on January 22, 1754. He was gladly received by the Society, and as a token of their esteem was given $250. The society insisted on his remaining with them several months before he went to Holland, so as to further matters for them. He arrived in Holland about April 1. While he was in Holland, the Charity society appointed him its superintendent at a salary of $500 a year, and Chandler wrote to him, April 5, notifying him of the appointment. It was very proper that Schlatter should be chosen the superintendent of the society, for his work had led to the beginning of the movement. Besides, he was very famil- iar with the needs and peculiarities of the Pennsylvania Germans, and it was expected that his appointment would carry weight with it in Pennsylvania, Gilbert Tennant 446 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. and Samuel Davies, two of the leading Presbyterian min- isters, who were in London that winter, also bore testi- mony to his ability and fitness. He therefore asked (May 14) the Holland deputies to dismiss him from the Re- formed church at Philadelphia.* They granted him his dismissal, but dismissed him not only from the church at Philadelphia, but also entirely from the coetus. His dis- missal was dated June 19, 1754. Schlatter closed up his accounts with them, 1746-1754, showing that he had received $1820 and expended $2368.80, and during these seven years had in addition to provide his family with food and clothing. However, his mother had given him $1000, which he had used. The society in London also appointed trustees in Penn- sylvania, who should superintend its work, James Hamil- ton, lieutenant governor ; William Allen, chief justice ; Richard Peters, secretary of Philadelphia ; Benjamin Franklin, postmaster general, and Conrad Weiser, the prominent Indian interpreter, and ordered them to open schools at Reading, York, Easton, Lancaster, Skippack and Hanover. The society also published, in 1754, a pamphlet entitled "A Memorial of the Case of the Ger- man Emigrants Settled in Pennsylvania." It said that the population of Pennsylvania was 190,000, of whom 100,000 were Germans, and 30,000 of thorn were Re- * lie seems to have clung to the idea that he was pastor of that charge to the end' SCHLATTER AND THE OHARITY SCHOOLS. 447 formed. It says that they were ignorant, and because unable to speak English, liable to lapse back into serai- civilization and become like the Indians around them ; that they were liable to become allies to the French, as both nations were from the continent of Europe, especially as their lack of knowledge of the English language would prevent their becoming united with the English. If there- fore England would make herself sure to retain this col- ony, she must educate them and make them English. This memorial was, however, not quite true to the facts. (The Germans were not inclined to become savages because of lack of schools. They had their parochial schools, and printing press, on which Saur had published (1743) the first Bible published in America. Neither were the Ger- mans inclined to join with the French.) The memorial also describes the labors of Weiss and Schlatter among the Germans. It is noticeable that it says not a word about the labors of Muhlenberg, the founder of the Lutheran Church, or any other among the Germans. It seems to rely entirely on Schlatter's work. Dr. Smith returned to Philadelphia, May 22, 1754. He attempted to call the American trustees together, but failed, as Peters, Franklin and Weiser were absent at Albany about an Indian treaty. Before a meeting could be held, Saur, the editor of the leading German paper, published in his issue of June 26 and July 1 a bitter 9,ttack on the whole movement, He denied that the Ger- 448 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. mans were an illiterate people ; charged that the new schools would deprive them of their German language by teaching their children English. He also charged that it was a scheme to draw the Germans into the Episcopal Church. The first meeting of the trustees was held at the house of Judge Allen, at Mt. Airy, Pa., August 10, 1754. They decided to follow the instructions of the English society and open schools at Reading, York, Easton, Lancaster, (New) Hanover and Skippack ; that six to eleven local trustees should be appointed to each school, who were to be divided between the Reformed, the Lutherans and the English. A letter was read from Muhlenberg, warmly commending the movement. He suggested that the Society aid Franklin in his effort to establish a German printing house, so as to lessen the unfortunate influence of Saur. Smith was appointed the secretary of the American trus- tees. A second meeting was held, August 23, 1754, at the governor's house at Bush Hill. All the trustees were present except Allen. Two petitions were received from Muhlenberg's Lutheran congregations at New Hanover and New Providence. The society thanked them for these requests, and the offer of their school-houses, but as it was an undenominational society, it had to decline them, but suggested that they get the Reformed to join ^vith them. They appointed local trustees. Among these the Reformed SCHLATTER AND THE CHARITY SCHOOLS. 449 at Lancaster were represented by Adam Simon Kuhn, Rev. Mr. Otterbeiu and Sebastian Graff, at New Provi- dence and Skippack by Abram Sahler and Dr. John Die- mer, at Reading by Isaac Levan and Samnel High, at New Hanover by Henry Antes and John Reifsnyder. It declined to appoint the Reformed and Lutheran minister at each place for fear of denominational prejudice. It decided to buy Franklin's printing press, and soon began the publication of a German paper and also of some Ger- man books and almanacs. On September 6, 1755, Saur again attacked the Charity schools. The conduct of the Germans in refusing the Charity schools was not wise, but neither were the promoters of the movement wise in their statements about the Germans, which reflected on their education and devotion to Protestantism or to England. Schlatter arrived in America September 28, 1754. He had been detained in England on business for the society. While in London he enlisted the influence of Penn in favor of the society, and also handed the printed Memorial to the king, who some time later gave 1 000 pounds. He arrived in America just in time to influence the coetus and to offset any influence that Saur might have exerted among it by his attacks. Two days after his arrival Smith wrote to Rieger and also to Stoy, sending them the published state- ment of the movement. In his letter he states that the society would aid in filling up the deficiencies in the salar- ies of the Reformed ministers. He asked how many min- 29 450 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. isters there were, and how much their salaries fell short, and suggested that they name some young men who might be supported in studying for the ministry. Rieger and Stoy replied that as this was a matter of such weighty importance, it would require the consideration of the wliole coetus, and Schlatter would then explain the whole project to them. On October 28 the Reformed congregation of New Hanover petitioned for a school, and the next day the Reformed congregation at New Providence did so, Leydich presenting these petitions personally to the trustees. But by May 6 the Reformed of New Hanover, remembering their former opposition to Schlatter in the coetus, began to find fault with the Charity schools because Schlatter was superintendent, and the elders refused him their pulpit. They declared they would have nothing to do with them till they had first heard from the Holland deputies about them. On December 10 another meeting of the trustees Mas held, at which Schlatter was also present as superintend- ent. Smith read the pamphlet that he had prepared, entitled "A brief History of the Rise and Progress of the Scheme for Carrying on the Instruction of poor Germans and their Descendants." It was approved, and 1500 copies were ordered to be printed. A petition was brought from Reading. On December 26 a petition was received from the Lutheran and the Reformed congregations at Vincent, Cliester county, and was granted, and Louis Ache appointed school-master. Sebastian Wagner and SCHLATTER AND THE CHARITY SCHOOLS. 451 Peter Stager were the Calvinists signing the request. A petition from the Reformed and Lutheran congregations of Upper Salford was granted, and Rev. Mr. Schultz, a Lutheran minister, appointed as school-teacher. On Jan. 15, 1755, a petition from the congregations of Tulpehocken, Lebanon county, and Heidelberg, Berks county, was received at a meeting, but as they differed as to the loca- tion of the school, it was referred back to them until they chose its location. A petition was also received from the Lancaster congregation for a Latin school-master. The meeting ordered that a letter of introduction be prepared for Schlatter, and also a letter of instruction to him. By February 25 the report of the trustees was issued. Schlatter now began opening the schools. On Feb- ruary 16 he opened one at New Providence with Charles Cornelius Rabatau as school-master ; on March 1 at LTp- per Salford, and on March 5 at Reading. On April 1 Conrad Weiser opened a school at Tulpehocken and Hei- delberg, John Davies, from Ireland, school-master. On May 8 he opened a school at Vincent, Chester county ; on May 16 at Easton, and on July 1 at Lancaster. The project of the schools thus seemed to be popular. The society had intended to open twenty-five schools when it appointed Schlatter, but applications were made for only eighteen, and only twelve were opened. Smith and Schlatter made a visitation of the schools, July 25, 1755, 452 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. and also a second visitation in April, 1756, going even to the frontiers.* The Reformed coetus was at the beginning quite favor- able to the movement. Even before the society was organ- ized in America, Stoy, Otterbein, liieger and DuBois wrote a joint letter, that their only hope in the midst of the divisions in the coetus was the establishment of the Charity schools, about which they had heard from England. The coetus of April, 1755, took action approving of the society, sending it a vote of thanks, and at the request of the society appointed Stoy and Otterbein as their deputies to inspect the schoolmasters. They already began to reap good results from it. Thus on June 23, 1755, AVeiss gave a receipt for four pounds to the society for work done as a catechist in the schools near him. On June 25 Steiner * The report of the society for 1759 was : Number of Scholars. 1. At New Providence, Phila, county. 50, almost all Germans. 2. At Upper Dublin, Phila county. 48, onethinl Germans, 3. At Northampton, Bucks county. 60, all low Dutch. 4. At Lancaster, Lancaster county. 05, nearly one-half Germans. 5. At York, York county, fi6, more than one-half Germans. 6. At New Hanover, Berks county. 45, all Germans. 7. At Reading, Berks county. 36, more than one-half Germans. 8. At Vincent, Chester county. 45, all Germans. 9. Presbytery school for educating the youth for the ministry, 25 Total, 440 N, B. — These numbers were taken just after the harvest, when the schools were but thin. In winter the numbers eilucated in this charity often amount in all to nearly 600, and have amounted to 750, before the school at Easton and that at Codorus were broken up by the Indian incursions. Upwards of two-thirds are of German parentage. SCHLATTER AND THE CHARITY SCHOOLS. 453 gave a similar receipt for four pounds, and on September 9 Schlatter receipted for five pounds for the use of the " Calvinist congregation" in Philadelphia. Later in the year, however, Stoy criticises the schools in a letter because they were not entirely Reformed. He also took umbrage at the words used by Dr. Smith, " The Lutherans are nearer to the Church of England than the Calvinists," The coetus of 1756 was also somewhat unfriendly because of an expression that Smith had used in a letter to Otterbein, that " the fathers in Holland had nothing to do with it." The coetus resented anything against the Holland Church. Some of them began to fear that the scheme at bottom might be after all nothing but a political scheme, and they wrote a letter to Franklin saying that the Holland depu- ties desired to know whether the society had not already ap- propriated something to the salaries of the ministers. This was true, as the Charity society had appropriated in 1753 200 pounds to the Reformed ministers, which was to be divided among them so as to make up for deficiency of sala- ries. This coetus received $214.40, and divided it among the ministers. The coetus of 1757 expressed less hope for the schools, because they were only English, and said that if the children were to be taught in the German language, they must have their own parochial schools. It, however, reported that the society had given them $192 for their salaries. Steiner in his letter of 1758 reported that the ministers knew the Charity schools better and would aid 454 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. them. In 1758 it received about $192. Coetus declared that in all it had received its third donation from the socie- ty. In 1761 it reported to Holland that the society had not paid anything for two years. In 1763 the Holland deputies wrote to London asking that they be aided, and the coetus of that year thanked them for their eflbrt. But by 1763 the society had ceased its activity. The reason for this was the gradual decrease of the receipts and interest in the society. We found a number of its notices for meetings from 1757-1759. These meet- ings were held in London in the west room behind St. Dunstan's, and at the Crown and Anchor on the Strand. Thus the following was addressed to Rev. Mr. "VV ostein, AYigmore, Cavendish Square : "Sir: Jan. 3, 1758. " You are desired to meet the nobleman and gentlemen entrusted with the moneys collected for the use of the for- eign Protestants in Pennsylvania on Saturday, the seventh instant, at Richards' Coffee House, near St. Dunstun's church, in Fleet street, at twelve o'clock. " Samuel Chandler." The society generally held its meetings monthly on Saturdays. We found notices of the following dates still in existence : January 25, 1757, called meeting on 29 ; May 25, for meeting on 28 ; August 22, for meeting on 27 ; January 3, 1758, for meeting on 7 ; February 7, for meeting on 11 ; April 25, for meeting on 29 ; December 13, for meeting on 16; January 16, 1759, for meeting on SCHLATTER AND THE CHARITY SCHOOLS. 455 20 (this last oue announced that Provost Smith would be present) ; April 30, 1759, for May 5, at 1 p. m. The society had started off with a fine gift of about $6000 from the Scotch Church, |5000 from the king and $100 from the Princess of Wales — altogether $11,100. To this may be added small gifts received from other individuals and churches. Chandler, in 1757, says he hoped to get a yearly donation from the king, and he seems to be success- ful, for in his letters he acknowledges that he received, in 1758, $1000 from the king, and the same amount the next year, although he had to write repeatedly to the Duke of Newcastle about the matter. In 1760 the king paid $2000, and also in 1761, when the society appropriated 300 pounds to the ministers and 370 pounds 13 shillings to school-masters. Then came the death of the king. Chandler, the unwearied friend and the soul of the enterprise, wrote to the Duke of Newcastle, stating that if this movement was to continue, it would depend entirely on the liberality of tlie king, and he most earnestly begged the king to aid it. He also proceeded to reorganize the society by appointing a new board.* The members of the new * In this the Presbyterians were represented by Revs. Earle, D. D., Chandler and Pope, with John Dunn and Thomas Holmes as laymen ; the Congregationalists by Revs. Jennings, D D., and Goll, and Mr. Crisp and John Winter as laymen ; the Baptists by Revs. S ennet and Bulkley, and Messrs Stinton and Stud as laymen. Rev. Drs, Ear'e, Jennings and Stew- art had been among the ministers who had received the money before, while Messrs. Dunn, Holmes, Stinton and Stud were the treasurers of their respec- tive denominations. 456 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. board were all dissenters, thus refuting the charge made by Saur that the society was an Episcopalian body, labor- ing to spread Episcopalianism. The Episcopalians are noticeably absent, perhaps because they had their own society to spread their Church in Pennsylvania, namely " The Society for the Propagation of the Gospel in For- eign Parts." The new king seems to have made a dona- tion, for which Chandler thanks him, June 3, 1762. The next year he seems to have ceased giving, and the society having no money to continue its work, fell to pieces, so that its work ceased in 1763. The whole amount that seems to have been raised was $11,000 given by the king at different times, and $6000 given by the Scotch Church, in all, with the gift of the Princess of Wales, $17,100. This, with other smaller amounts given by individuals and churches may have run the total up to nearly $20,000. Of this about $567 was paid for the Franklin press, and more for the publication of suitable books and the new German ncAvspaper. Be- sides Schlatter's salary the society tried to send $2500 a year for the school-masters, etc., and seems to have appro- priated about $600 for the Reformed ministers. When the society disbanded it still had in its treasury a small balance, which Chandler said he was willing should be sent to Smith for the University of Pennsylvania.* * Some of its money was also used to educate Presbyterian students for the ministry. The support of the Presbyterian students for the ministry by this society reveals an interesting bit of history In a letter to Chandler of April, SCHLATTER AND THE CHARITY SCHOOLS. 457 During all the history of this society the Reformed Church of Hollaud sustained the most cordial relations to it. The Dutch and English encouraged each other in friendly rivalry in their efforts to do something for the Pennsylvania Germans and the Reformed. When the grant of the states of Holland and Friesland for |800 a year was about to run out in 1756, Chandler wrote from England urging the Dutch to use their influence to secure the continuance of that grant, as, if the Dutch lessened their gifts, the English would lessen theirs, as the English had been giving on the expectation that the Dutch would aid their brethren in the Reformed faith. The deputies, when they appeal to the states of Holland and Friesland, used the liberality of the English as an argument to stir them up to do something for Pennsylvania again. As a result the states of Holland and West Friesland continued their donations of |800 for three years more. Thus the society and the Dutch labored in harmony. The classis of Amsterdam on June 4, 1753, thanked Chandler for so greatly aiding Thomson in his work, and asked their prayers for guidance in the under- taking. And when Stoy wrote to the Holland fathers, somewhat criticising the movement, they replied, recom- 1755, I)r. Smith tells the story of the woes of the Presbyieiiaus, who we e diviJed between Old and New Lights The latter, who were followers of White- field, had taken their college and theological seminary with them, so the Old Lights or Conservatives had none nearer than New Haven, and that could not supply students enough. So it was suggested to graft a theological seminary OB to the University of Philadelphia, where Smith taught, and this money was to aid their t^tudcnts. 458 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. mending it most higlily. The Charity society also aided some of the Reformed ministers on their way to America. Thus when the deputies sent Muntz to America, the society bore the expenses of his family. And when the next minister, Alsentz, was sent by them, they bore all his expenses to America. But when the next minister, Stapcl, passed through, he made himself obnoxious to Chandler and was not helped. The society also recommended Rev. Mr. Kals to the Philadelphia congregation. Here they transcended their authority, as he had not been recom- mended to them by the Holland Church. And the Hol- land Church remind them that he was a deposed minister. During all this movement it was noticeable that in America although the movement included work among the Lutherans as Germans, yet no mention seems to have been made of Muhlenberg's work, or of any money, as far as we have yet been able to find out, given to the Ijuth- eran pastors for salaries as pastors, as there was to the Re- formed. Schlatter's work, in all the publications of the society, was made the basis of the movement. As he was also superintendent, it made the Reformed prominent. It was, therefore, much more intimately connected with the Reformed than has hitherto been supposed, and for that reason we have described it so fully. Thus the Re- formed had the honor of having had in Schlatter the first superintendent of public schools in Pennsylvania. For this society was really a system of j)ublic sc-liools like SCHLATTER AND THE CHARITY SCHOOLS. 459 that which was inaugurated a century later in the state. And although the society failed, yet it set in motion cer- tain movements which have since become permanent, as in the University of Pennsylvania and the public school sys- tem of the state. CHAPTER IV.— SECTION X. SCHLATTER'S LIFE AFTER LEAVING THE COETUS. Schlatter having labored for the Reformed Church in Pennsylvania for nine years, ceased being a member of the coetus in 1755. And during the remaining twenty-five years of his life he never attended any of the meetings, although he might easily have done so from his home at Chestnut Hill near Philadelphia. He started the coetus and then left it for others to build up. The greater part of his life in America was spent as an independent Re- formed minister. It has hitherto been a mystery why he left the coetus. Harbaugh suggests that another quarrel between him and some of the members of the coetus was the cause. He bases this on a letter of Stoy of October, 1755 (which he erroneously places in 1756), where Stoy, speaking of the coetal letter of Schlatter of the previous year, says : " Schlatter added a letter containing many things of which there was no mention in the proceedings themselves. This a])pears to be not unlike frjuid. And what is not contained in the proceedings can not be put to our account. Let Schlatter be responsible for that himself" While this letter may liint at some friction between Stoy and Schlatter, yet it does not give the real cause why schlattee's later life. 461 Schlatter left the coetiis. The true reason was that the deputies in Holland ordered him to leave. At the depu- ties' meeting, April 2, 1755, after they had expressed great joy at learning from the coetus that peace existed among the brethren, they, however, take the following action : " The deputies are very much surprised that the min- isters had called Rev. Mr. Schlatter in to their delibera- tions after he, having received his dismissal, had returned to Pennsylvania, and had not only made him moderator and amanuensis, but had also charged him with the visitor- ship of the Pennsylvania churches, and thus had charged him with and urged upon him nearly the whole rule, and so hindered him very much in the supervision of the schools. Since he had been dismissed that he might give himself wholly to the benefit of the schools, the deputies order that he be no longer troubled with the affairs of the Pennsylvania churches, all the more since his Honor, because of his dismissal from the churches, neither may nor can be recognized or received as a member of the coetus, much less may he be burdened with the matters of the coetus or the service of the churches." This is further proved by a letter of the classis of Amsterdam to Schlatter of June 5, 1755, ordering him to leave. This is very summary action. The deputies reit- erate their action, November 1755, when they find that Schlatter had been a member of the coetus of 1755 : "Dep- uties would overlook several actions contrary to our inten- tion, because the letter was not received in time, but under- stand that its injunctions, particularly touching the dismis- 462 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. sal of Dominie Schlatter, should be strictly followed up, and in regard to articles 20 and 23, they insist that Schlat- ter shall remain off of the committee," From the time their letter was received in Peunsylvania, Schlatter dis- appears from the minutes of the coetus here and of the deputies in Holland. Schlatter did a great w^ork in connection with the coetus. His most prominent characteristic was his tire- less industry. The extracts of his journal give data like these : On September 27th, 1746, he preached at Lancas- ter and returned to Philadelphia on the 28tli, a distance of sixty-three miles. On February 26th, 1747, he trav- eled thirty-six miles toHallmill to administer communion. On September 21st he again rides to Lancaster in a single day. When one remembers that his journeys were made not over fine roads, but often through forests on mere paths, and over rivers sometimes swollen by rains, one can understand better the privations of such journeys. Frequently he would tire out the other ministers, who would have to stop and rest while he pressed on. His journeys of 8000 miles in over four years show his amaz- ing activity. His industry ought to be electric and enthuse many home missionaries in our Church to-day. What our slow, conservative Church needs is to beSchlat- terized with his tireless industry and activity. He was a man too of considerable executive ability, which he used to bring the Church to its climax by organ- Schlatter's later life. 463 izing the coetus, for which the German Reformed churches must ever thank him. He completed what Boehm began. Boehm organized the first congregations. Schlatter organ- ized the congregations into the first synod. But although we are greatly indebted to him for the organization of the coetus, yet historical fairness will not permit us to canon- ize him as a saint. He organized the coetus, but he did not perfectly manage it after it was organized. This was due to several causes : 1. It was due to the complex elements of which the coetus was composed. Before he came, Boehm, Weiss and Rieger had not been in sympathy with each other. Boehm openly distrusted Rieger that he was Reformed. Even after the coetus was formed, he does not consider Rieger thoroughly Reformed, because he did not sign the Canons of Dort. Now, if it was difficult to handle the coetus when it was small, this difficulty became the greater as the coetus became larger, because the diversity between its members was greater. And Schlatter proved himself unable to keep peace between the diverse elements. 2. It was due to the Holland fathers to some extent. We would not be understood as criticising them. That would be unkind, considering the very kind and unsel- fish treatment they gave to our early Church. But they were too far away. They were not always able to suggest the wisest methods. Thus they appointed Schlatter a sort of visitor for the congregations for the first part of 464 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. his ministry here. They did not consider that that office, when held too long by him, would give offence, so that he was charged with wanting to become permanent presi- dent and superintendent. Then the deputies did not order him to close up the Reiff money as quickly as it would have been best. They left part of it in Schlatter's hands. And while he was waiting for them to tell him what to do with it, his enemies took advantage of this and charged him with irregularities in not giving it to the objects for which it was collected. Yet the depu- ties did not intend to put him in a false position. Again, the deputies continued sending to him the Holland donations. This often placed him in a very awkward position, as with Weiss and Leydich in 1753. These wanted the money, and yet the Holland deputies had for- bidden him to pay it to any one who had left the coetus, Schlatter in all this was only carrying out the orders of the Holland deputies, but it did not save him from bring- ing down on his head criticism and wrath. 3. It was partly his own fault. In saying this we do not mean to criticise him. Every man has his weak points. No man is absolutely perfect, either in morality or in judgment. He made mistakes, who does not? And to fairly judge him, we must understand where his weaknesses lay, as well as where his strength. Part of his trouble lay in his youth and inexperience. He was only about thirty years old when he came to America. Schlatter's later life. 465 He never had had charge of a congregation before he came. It is true, he acted as vicar to a minister for a year in Thurgau, but a vicar is only a substitute, without any of the responsibilities of the pastor. At St. Gall he was only evening preacher of a small church on the sub- urbs. Of the many varied duties and responsibilities that come to a pastor, he had no experience. And of the duties of a superintendent he knew nothing. He did well, considering his meagre previous opportunities. But the Holland deputies placed burdens on his shoulders too great for him with his youth and inexperience to bear. His position needed an older and more experienced head. He had older men with larger experience than himself right under him in the coetus, as Bojhm and Weiss. One reason why Steiner looked down on him was because Schlatter was so much younger than he. Of course Schlatter could not help that he was young. That was not his fault ; nevertheless it proved a hindrance to his work. Then too the peculiarities of his temperament did to him what they do to all of us, — led him into mistakes. Our mistakes are often exaggerated excellencies, which prove too strong when there is no counterbalancing thing in our nature. Sometimes our strongest points prove to be our weakest. Schlatter was ardent and active, as we have seen. They were excellent elements, and made him energetic and successful in organizing the Church. But 30 466 THE GERMAN EEFOEMED CHURCH IN U. S. his very impulsiveness led him astray into too quick judg- ments. He was charged by his enemies with magnifying his office too much, — so much that he wanted to be superin- tendent over the Church. He denied this, and his friends denied it. And yet we fear that sometimes his activity got the better of him, so that they could charge him with this. Again, his impulsiveness, we believe (for we can't explain it in any other way), led him to mistakes in constitutional questions. Perhaps Boehm was too much of a parliamentarian ; if so, Schlatter was rather too little. Thus his action in confirming the wife of an elder in Boehm's congregation at Falkner Swamp (Schlatter calls him an elder) is indefensible from a constitutional stand- point. Boehm mentions a worse case in his letter of 1748. The Philadelphia congregation had been under Boehm's constitution for many years before Schlatter came, and according to it four elders and two deacons composed the consistory. But when Schlatter took charge of the Phila- delphia congregation, what did he do but overturn things? He at once fixed the number of church officers at twelve, and installed them when Boehm was present. At the in- stallation he made them all stand in a row and ordained them all, some of them having been ordained before. Now this was wrong according to all the church customs. An officer ordained once is always ordained, and a second ordination is suj)erfluous. Again, Schlatter at once tried to introduce the St. Gall liturgy, which differed from the Schlatter's later life. 467 Palatinate, which Boehm had been using on some points. This caused, says Boehm, confusion and criticism at mar- riages and ordinations, when such liturgies were used. It was ill-advised on Scidatter's part to introduce a new Churcli custom, at any rate so soon. And afterward the Holland deputies searchingly inquire what sort of a new Church order Schlatter had introduced, because they said the proper one was that of the Netherlands. And yet, while Schlatter's character, like all of ours, reveals weak points, how wonderfully God overrules even our weakness for His glory. God can use and sanctify our peculiarities. Thus Schlatter in his early life had a roving disposition. God utilized it to send him to this western world to do a great work for His Church. Like him, God has turned many a one who is a born traveler into a missionary, to travel for His kingdom. Schlatter's impulsiveness God utilized to aggressive work in America in founding; His Church. Well is it for us to allow God to use us as He sees best — use our peculiar bent of mind — use our ruling trait of character — yes, even our weak- nesses and failings for His glory and the spread of His kingdom. Schlatter's withdrawal from the coetus was unfortu- nate, both for himself and for the Reformed. It was unfortunate for his own sake, for it robbed him of the continual honor that he would have had in the coetus as being the founder of that body. Had he been able tq \ 468 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. remain in it, his whole life would have been interwoven with it and it with liim. It was unfortunate for the Church in some directions. He had, as we see, many years of activity before liim, which might have been used for the benefit of the Church. All this was lost to the Church, because he was outside of the coetus. Still, his monument remains in the synodical organization of the Eeformed Church, and will remain as long as it exists. And yet, although his departure was a loss, it was, per- haps, best that it occurred, for peace came to the coetus, and good men rose up to take his place. Schlatter having left the coetus in 1755, soon found that the Charity school scheme was not to prove a great success. So he accepted a position as chaplain in the British army in the Royal American regiment, of whose fourth battalion he was made chaplain. He was appointed to this position, March 25, 1757, by the commanding general, on " account of his ability and expertness in sev- eral languages, and in the meantime he exercised supervi- sion over the schools." This regiment was composed largely of German emigrant-e and officered by German officers. On May 5 the English fleet sailed from New York for Halifax. This regiment was present at the siege of Halifax and Louisburg, the latter being captured, July 27, 1757. Bancroft thus speaks of these patriotic chaplains there : " There were the cha})lains who preached to the regiments of citizen soldiers, a renewal of the da^s Schlatter's later life. 469 when Moses with the rod of God in his hand sent Jcthro against Amelek." On his way to Louisburg, Schlatter passed Cape Breton, off which he liad been so nearly wrecked eleven years before. After the war had closed with the siege of Quebec, September, 1759, he must have come home almost immediately, for in the next month he brought a call to Muhlenberg from the Germans of Lu- nenburg, Halifax, offering him $450 for his services as pastor and teacher of the parochial school. The Reformed of Lunenburg afterward appealed for help to the Re- formed coetus of Pennsylvania in 1772. After the French war Schlatter resided at Chestnut Hill, near Philadelphia, on a piece of ground, says Har- baugh, called the Cooms farm, about ten miles from Philadelphia and four from Germantown, near the Phila- delphia and Reading turnpike, fronting on a lane which runs from the pike. He gave this place the name of Sweetland. He was not with General Forbes in his march to Pittsburg. But when the Bouquet expedition went to Pittsburg, he went along as chaplain of the second battalion, having been appointed to it, July, 1764. In the fall of 1776 he disposed of his plantation at Chestnut Hill and removed to a small -farm, which he had pnr- chased fifteen years before of Anthony Tnnis. In 1776 he had l)cen assessed for owning 130 acres of ground, two horses and five cows. When the war of the Revolution broke out, he strongly sided with the patriots. His son, Gerhard Richard, 470 THE GERMAN EEFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. became adjutant in the Flying Camp, and was in the bat> ties of German town, Princeton and Brandy wine. Another son was a grenadier. At Germantown he had two horses shot under him. When the British captured Philadel- phia, Schlatter was exposed to much danger. He was imprisoned in Philadelphia and his house plundered by the British soldiers. While this was taking place, his youngest daughter, Rachel, only fourteen years old, at the risk of her life, seized his portrait hanging on the wall, snatching it out of the hands of the soldier who reached to take it. She then ran with the swiftness of a deer and escaped with it. The soldiers broke up his furniture, cut open his feather beds, scattering the feathers to the winds. They threw, says Harbaugh, the silverware into the well, and put his papers on a pile and burned them. All that his family rescued were his coat of arms, a silver-handled knife and fork and silver spoon that he had used when in the army, and a case of small instruments, such as com- pass, lancet, pincers, etc.* While he was in prison, his daughter, Rachel, would often ride to Philadelphia on horseback, bringing him provisions. When the American army lay near Germantown, Rachel used to plait the hair of the vVmerican officers, for whicli they paid her pocket money. By the plundering he became comparatively i)oor. In 1778 he bought a small home for $1200 on the turnpike • These were preserved in the family of his descenduuts, who now live sit Roxborough, Pa. Schlatter's later life. 471 from Chestuut Hill to Barren Hill and half a mile from his former residence, on the great road between Philadel- phia and Plymouth. It was on the east side of the turn- pike from Chestnut Hill to Barren Hill. There he lived in quietness, occasionally preaching and performing many marriages.* He preached in Philadelphia, May 20, 1762. Muhlenberg also speaks of his preaching at Barren Hill : "On Easter Monday, April 12, 1762, Mr. Schlatter also came and had an appointment made, after my sermon to administer the holy communion to some Eeformed mem- bers. After my sermon Mr. Schlatter added a short exhortation, still further impressing upon their hearts what they had heard. After this he went with his church members into the union school house, where he adminis- tered the Lord's Supper." Dr. Harbaugh, in his biogra- phy of Schlatter, tells the story that it was customary for the female worshipers at Barren Hill to wear short gowns and neat aprons. When Schlatter would walk up the aisle to preach, he would always do so in a hurried man- ner. He would sometimes stop on his way, seize one of these clean aprons and wipe the dust of his glasses, which he was carrying in his hands. This Barren Hill congre- gation he seems to have supplied with services for the Reformed, but as it was an independent congregation, we find no record of it in the coetus' acts. He was on pleas- * Mr. Jonas Detweiler sajs that from November 12, 1763, to November 7, 1768, he bad 64 marriage licenses; from December 23, 1768, to July 9, 1770, 64, for which he received the sum of 37 pounds and 10 shillings. On April 10, 1771, he returned 12 marriage licenses, for which he returned 15 pounds. 472 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. ant social terms with Muhlenberg. On March 10, 1762, Muhlenberg and the Swedish minister, Wrangel, visited Schlatter. They were received in a friendly way and entertained for the night. On November 22, 1762, Muh- lenberg says he visited Schlatter, where he with others had an edifying conversation about the kingdom of the cross. On December 15 Schlatter s})ent the night with Muhlenberg. When Muhlenberg was buried at the Trappe, October 10, Schlatter attended the funeral of his old and intimate friend. He was on pleasant social terms with many other leading men, as General Hiester, after- wards governor. Schlatter died, November 1, 1790, and was buried on November 4 in the Reformed burying ground at Phila- delphia, which was located where Franklin Square now is. Dr. Harbaugh says : " Directly east of the sparkling jets, a few feet from the edge of the circular walk, under the green sod lie Rev. Messrs. Steiner and AVinkhaus, and Drs. Weyberg and Hendcl, the elder. Directly north of this spot, about midway between it and Vine street, lies Rev. Michael Schlatter. As in the case of the rest, his tombstone was laid upon the grave and covered by the grading." His will bears date of October 22, 1790, and was admitted to probate on November 23, 1790. His daughters, Hester, Elizabeth and Rachel, lived at Chest- nut Hill and were communicant members of the Re- formed church of Germantown. Rev. Albert Helffensteiu preached their funeral sermon. / CHAPTER IV.— SECTION XI. THE ATTEMPTED UNION OF THE REFORMED WITH THE PRESBYTERIANS AND THE DUTCH REFORMED. This was ODe of the most important movements attempted in the last century. It is true, the union did not take place. But in Church union, as in many other things, we learn as much by failures as by successes. Rev. Dr. Briggs* thus speaks of this attempted union : " Divine providence in 1744 aiforded the American (Presbyterian) synod a magnificent opportunity for combining the entire Presbyterian and Reformed strength in the colonies into one grand organization, etc," This is true. It forms a very interesting subject in our early Church history. The subject of uniting the German Reformed with the Presbyterians came up first in Holland in 1741. After they had been trying for ten years to gain sufficient information to intelligently aid the German Reformed, and were so often balked, and especially when Dorsius' account of the outlook was rather discouraging, it occurred to them that as Pennsylvania was an English colony and they had heard that there was a Presbyterian synod formed there, it might be well to turn over the Germans * [n his "American Presbyterianism," page 284. 474 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. to their care. The deputies, November 13, discussed the matter, that as Pennsylvania was a Protestant land, it might be possible to obtain better results if the German churches were united with the Presbyterians, and thus the Church of the Netherlands be relieved of the labor and expense of their care. The deputies ordered that a letter be written to Rev. Mr. Dorsius and to Rev. Mr. Freling- huysen, of New Jersey, for information. No reply came to this until 1743, when Dorsius him- self visited Holland and attended the meeting of the depu- ties, September 17, 1743. With the greatest interest they especially ask him what the Scotch Presbyterian coetus (synod) was ; what were its relations to the Reformed, and whether the Dutch and German congregations could not be united with it. They judged this very necessary, in order to prevent their disintegration. On September 20 the deputies addressed a letter to the officers of the Penn- sylvania congregations, asking whether it would not be possible for the Dutch and German congregations to be united with the Presbyterians. This letter was given to Dorsius, to take with him to Pennsylvania, to be given to all the German congregations, and especially to Boehm, their leading minister. Dorsius, very soon after landing in America, proceeded to carry out the instructions of the Holland deputies. He went to Philadelphia, where he had a conference with tlie two Presbyterian ministers on the proposed union. They thought it could be easily ATTEMPTED UNION. 475 arranged. He promised to have the request of the depu- ties translated into English and submit it to their synod. He laid it before the synod, and it acted on the letters, May 25, 1 744, thus : " The Rev. Mr. Dorsius, pastor of the Reformed Dutch chundi of Bucks county, laid a letter before us from the deputies of North and South Holland, wherein they desire of the synod an account of the state of the High German and Dutch churches in this province, and also of the churches belonging to the Presbyterian synod of Phila- delphia, and whether the Dutch churches may not be joined in communion with said synod, or if this cannot be, that they form themselves into a regular body and govern- ment among themselves. In pursuance of which letter the synod agree that letters be wrote in the name of the synod to the deputies of these synods in Holland in Latin, and to the Scotch ministers in Rotterdam, giving them an account of the churches here, and declaring our willing- ness to join with the Calvinist Dutch churches here, to assist each other as far as possible in promoting the com- mon interest of religion among us, and signifying the present great want of ministers among the High and Low Dutch (Germans and Dutch), with the desire that they may help in educating men for the work of the ministry." The synod, in order to carry this out, appointed a committee to correspond with the Church of Holland. This committee was composed of the president of the synod. Rev. Mr. McHenry, and Rev. Messrs. Andrews, Cross and Evans, Jr. Mr. McHenry wrote, June 14, 1744. In his letter he reciprocates the kindly feeling the 476 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. Church of Holland had shown toward the Presbyterian synod. He speaks of the respect wliich the Presbyterians had for the German Reformed, who hold to the doctrine of Calvin. He says that there are a great number of Ger- man Reformed in the colony, but they have only one or two ministers to serve them, and because they are neg- lected, they are in danger of being led astray by adven- turers, or by sects, or by the Moravians, mIio are multi- plying. He declares that the Presbyterians are favorable to union ; but if it could not be brought about, they were ready to aid the German Reformed to come to some organi- zation among themselves. He then appeals to the Church of Holland, so well known for its liberality, for a donation toward a high school, by which ministers might be edu- cated for the ministry. This school would probably also be a help to the Dutch and German churches, for their young men could also be educated there.* In addition to this letter McHeury also wrote a letter to Rev. JNIr. Ken- nedy, the pastor of the Presbyterian church at Rotterdam in Holland, June 26, 1744, because he had made known to Dorsius in Holland that he would be glad to help the movement. Kennedy ever afterward acted as the media- tor between the Holland synods and the Presbyterian * Through the division of the Presbyterians in 1741, by which the synod of Philadelphia had cast out the followers of Whitefield, the latter had taken the college with them and the synod of Philadelphia had no institution nearer than New Haven, so the Philadelphia synod was anxious to gain aid from the Dutch. They had established one the previous autumn with twelve pupils. ATTEMPTED UNION. 477 synod at Philadelphia. The letter to Kennedy says that " it was the unanimous resolve to admit the Reformed who held to the doctrines of Calvin, and that they rejoiced at so fine an opportunity. He says that some years before some of the Presbyterians proposed to the German Reformed to unite with them, that they then recognized this as just and good, but since then nothing had been done." These letters were not brought before the Holland synods until April 28, 1745, when they had come into the hands of the deputies. But as the matter in hand was so important they post- poned action until the meetings of the synods. The synods listened to the letter with great pleasure, but did nothing, simply referring it back to the deputies again for more information. They said they did not as yet have sufficient light in order to offer satisfactory advice about a matter of such importance. Besides Dorsius had not yet been heard from, and they did not know what the Dutch of New York would do. The Dutch never were in a hurry. The dep- uties, however, continued the work. On November 16 deputy DuYignon reported that he had had a long confer- ence at Rotterdam with Rev. Mr. Kennedy, who said that he thought there would be no trouble about union with the Presbyterians. He thought the Germans would be allowed sufficient freedom within the union so that they would be satisfied. The deputies heard with gladness the report of DuVignon, thanked Dominie Kennedy, and 478 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. asked the former to fiud out from the latter whether the Presbyterian synod had in it any elements of Arminianism. DuVignon reported at the meeting of March 15, 174G, that Kennedy did not believe that the Presbyterian church in Philadelphia allowed laxity of doctrine, but he would find out. By the time the next synod met in the sunmier of 1746 a new star had arisen in the path of the synod, namely, Schlatter. The deputies decided to wait for more information from him about the Germans, and also from Kennedy in regard to the Presbyterians. They, however, expressed a wish that the German churches might be united to the Presbyterian. But though everything looked so auspicious, and both the Dutch in Holland and the Presbyterians in Pennsyl- vania were favorable, nevertheless difficulties began to spring up. How often it hajjpens that the nearer two denominations are together, the farther they are aj)art. The closer toward union that denominations come, the larger become the few remaining diiferences. Mole hills are exaggerated into mountains, until the union is pre- vented, not by great differences, but by petty divergences. The first difficulty was tlie absolute refusal of the Ger- man Reformed of Pennsylvania to go into a union with the Presbyterians. Dorsius and his Dutch organization in Bucks county were favorable, but the Germans, who were far more numerous, were led by Bcelnn into direct oj)posi- tion to it, Boehni in his report to the de|)uties, 1744, ATTEMPTED UNION. 479 enumerates the following reasons against uniting with the Presbyterians : 1. The attachment of the German Reformed to their Church constitution, which he had drawn up and which they would have to give up if they entered the Presby- terian synod. 2. The ignorance of the English by the Germans was an insuperable barrier. Few of the Germans understood English. How could they get along with each other without understanding one another ? 3. The giving up of the Heidelberg Catechism, as that catechism was not accepted by the Presbyterians. The Germans greatly loved the Heidelberg Catechism. 4. The Germans were also pledged to the Canons of Dort, which was not among the Presbyterian creeds, and they did not wish to give it up. 5. Boehm says that the Germans were accustomed to their formulas for the sacraments and marriage. (The Germans had been accustomed to a simple liturgical ser- vice on these occasions, but not at the regular church ser- vices.) These, he says, they did not wish to give up, Avhich they would have to do, if they went into union with the Presbyterians. For these reasons Boehm declined to go into the union. The second opposition came from the Dutch Reformed of New York. They had always been strongly Calvin- istic, and they looked on the Presbyterians as containing 480 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. elements of Arminianisra. The Presbyterians around them in New York belonged to the Whitefield party, upon which they looked with suspicion. And they seemed to have judged the Philadelphia synod by the Presbyterians around them, although the Philadelphia synod had sepa- rated from the New York synod, because it stood on a higher Calvinistic position than the latter. The Dutch ministers wrote to Holland, objecting to a union with the Presbyterians, lest they be made to unite with Arminians. Thus the matter was held in abeyance until the Holland Church had gained more information about the Philadel- phia Presbyterians. Meanwhile the Presbyterians did not let the matter rest. They felt aggrieved by the charges made against them by the Holland Church for their departure from Cal- vinism. On October 16, 1747, Rev. Mr. Cross, of Phila- delphia, wrote a letter to INIr. Kennedy, of Rotterdam, defending the Presbyterians. He said that they favored a union with the Germans and Dutch ; that the objections of the Germans on the ground of the Heidelberg Catechism and the Canons of Dort were of little importance. They would be allowed to retain these creeds and still be in the same organization as the Presbyterians. Cross said the Presby- terians of Philadelphia held to the same standards and for- mulae as the Presbyterian Church of Scotland, with which the Hollanders considered themselves to agree. He ])ro- poscd a federative union, in which tlu; (icrnians could still ATTEMPTED UNION. 48] retain their catechism and their formulas. He says he was especially astonished at the Dutch ministers of New York in charging them with heterodoxy. He said the White- field movement had caused the schism, and the liberals in theology had been driven out. He denied that there was any Arminianism or Pelagianism among the ministers of the Presbyterian synod of Philadelphia. On the contrary the synod had been careful to exclude from it the followers of Whitefield. He closed with thanks to Mr. Kennedy for maintaining their cause before the Holland deputies. This letter for some reason did not come before the deputies till March, 1750. But though delayed it could not have come at a more fortunate time to help the move- ment for union. For the Holland deputies were just beginning to hear of the unfortunate quarrel between Stei- ner and Schlatter in Philadelphia. And the more they heard of this, the more complicated it became and the less the deputies felt they knew how to bring peace. They became weary of the quarrel, and felt it would be a good thing to turn over the Germans to the Presbyterians. The latter were on the ground, while the deputies were far away, and the Presbyterians would therefore be able to decide matters better. Besides, other important matters, as the ordination of Lischy and Tempelman, were await- ing decision, and the deputies could not decide. And again, Boehm, the great opponent to union with the Pres- byterians, had died, so that there was now no opposition 31 482 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. to it in Pennsylvania, especially as Schlatter was favor- able. (And so this project for union reasserted itself in 1750, and came very nearly being accomplished in 1751, as the Holland synods virtually accepted it.) The depu- ties, therefore, took this action : " Since the anxiety of the deputies is increased, lest our pains and outlays for the Pennsylvania affairs may come to naught, when they might be saved by the Scotch Presbyterian Church, there- fore deputy Probsting Avas ordered to confer with Domi- nie Kennedy on the subject." When the South Holland synod met in the summer of 1750, one of its classes, the classis of Leyden, overtured it in favor of the union. The South Holland synod approved of the union, but as they found that some of the communications about it were in English, they referred it to the deputies for further delib- eration. The deputies reported to the North Holland synod in favor of it. The synod was pleased with this suggestion. Thus both of the synods that had the special charge of the work in Pennsylvania acted favorably toward the union. Deputy Binnevelt then wrote to DuBois, of New York, January 1, 1751, asking whether the idea of union with the Presbyterians would be a >vise move- ment to the Church and agreeable to him. At the next meeting of the South Holland synod in 1751 four of its classes. Delft, Schieland (Rotterdam), Bu- ren and Gouda, overtured it in favor of the union. They conferred with Mr. Schlatter, who was present at the ATTEMPTED UNION. 483 synod, about the matter. He had reported to the depu- ties, May, 1751, thus : "The reason why there is no union of the German Reformed Avith the Presbyterians, does not touch religion, for they Hve together as brethren, yes, even wish to be united. J3ut the ignorance of the Germans, and their obstinacy and wonderful misgivings would not permit it, because they looked upon it as a change of reli- gion." This is rather strong language, and severe, we think. But one thing it reveals, — it shows the tenacious love of the Germans for their Reformed faith and their Heidelberg Catechism. Schlatter was ordered to make every effort, when he returned to Pennsylvania, to bring about the union. However, at the meeting of the North Holland synod of 1751, which occurred later than that of the South Hol- land synod, opposition to the proposed union appeared. The synod said it had learned that the Presbyterian Church of Pennsylvania was not the same as the Church of Scotland, whose creed and cultus agreed with the Dutch, but it was an independent denomination, without creed or Church government, or simple liturgy, such as the Dutch used at their services. It therefore declined to go any farther toward the union, until DuBois, of New York, was heard, but it urged Schlatter to thoroughly organize the Germans into a strong coctus of their own, and also to keep up correspondence with the Dutch [^coetus of New York. 484 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. They ordered their deputies to vrrite to DuBois for infor- mation.* As a result of this action of the North Holland synod, the next year, 1752, the South Holland synod, which the year before had been so favorable and seemed to see hope for the German churches in Pennsylvania only in such a union, now decided against it on the same grounds that the North Holland synod did the year before, and the North Holland synod in 1753 reaffirmed its decision. Thus the attempted union failed. The charge of Armin- iauism in the Presbyterian synod stopped it. And Schlat- ter's success in organizing the Germans made it less necessary. So ended this union movement. Had it been accom- plished, it would have been one of the most important religious movements of the last century. Its political eifect would have been very far-reaching. Calvinism would have gained the ascendency in the colonics, as the Dutch, German, Scotch and French Calvinists became united. As the war of the Revolution, when viewed reli- giously, was a union of all who were Calvinists in doc- * All these things show that Rev. Dr. Briggs is wrong in his "American Presbyterianisiu." Ue there charges the conservative High Calvinists that when they drove out the Whitefield party, they prevented this attempted union of Scotch, Dutch and German Presbyterians. The very reverse is true. The Dutch had such a horror of Moravianism, which they considered allied with Whitefleldism, that they never would have allowed the Germans to unite with any synod containing the followers of Whitefield. Not merely this, but they refused to have anything to do with the synod of Philadelphia, to which they once belonged, even though it had cast them out. ATTEMPTED UNION. 485 trine, namely Presbyterians, Reformed, Congregationalists and Baptists, against Episcopacy (the only Arminian denomination favoring the American cause being the Lu- therans), it would have greatly strengthened this move- ment, if they had united in 1751 into an organic whole and moved together. It was not only an important movement, but also an interesting study in the new science of irenics or Church union. The time has come when this subject of Church union should be lifted up out of the mists of confusion, which have hitherto surrounded it, and be elevated into a science. The principles of international law are becoming clear and more defined, why not those of interdenomina- tional comity and union ? This effort of union reveals one of the greatest obstacles that has always stood in the way of union, namely ignorance or want of acquaintanceship. This was the reason why the Hollanders broke off the union. They were misinformed about the Presbyterians of Pennsylvania. They understood that they were a reli- gious denomination without creed or church government — a sort of a Congregationalist body. Where they could have gotten this idea, we do not know. The letters of DuBois, of New York, have not turned up as yet, but we do not believe he would charge the Presbyterians \vith Congregationalism, although we believe he would have charged them with heterodoxy, because he thought there were some Arminians among them, for the Presbyterians 486 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHTJRCH IN U. S. of New York were of the Whitcfield stamp. And again, the objections of the Pennsylvania churches would also have been met by a more thorough knowledge of church union as a science. This science had not been for- mulated by that time. It was an age of polemics, rather than of irenics, Bnt since then the science of union has crystallized into three forms : fusion (wdiere the denomi- nations melt into one), federation (where the denomina- tions remain distinct, but are united in some higher court, as the synod or alliance), and fellowship (where they remain distinct, but work together in the practical prob- lems that confront them). These may have many phases, but still they are the general principles. Now if Boehm had been aware of the federative form of union, he would not have raised the objections he did. But federative unions were unknown in those days, not even fellowship, to which the churches usually come first, being known to any extent. It has remained for this nineteenth century to develop the idea of federation and bring it into })romi- nence, and it seems destined to be one of the most popular forms of union in the future. And so in the providence of God these three denomi- nations, the Presbyterians, Dutch Reformed and German Reformed, were permitted to remain separate. Each was thus left to develop its own particular phase of Calvinism. Had the union occurred, the Dutch and German elements would doubtless have deen absorbed in the larger and con- ATTEMPTED UNION. 487 tinually increasing elements of the English Presbyterian- ism. But each was allowed to develop, and we have to-day the conservatism of the Dutch, the irenics of the German and the breadth of the Presbyterian. Besides, as denominations have now grown in this country so large as to become unwieldly, and therefore unable to give sufficient representation in up})er church courts, it is well that they remained apart and thus had formed smaller denomina- tions. Even the small ones will be large enough for all practical purposes by and by. Finally, even if the pro- posed union did not take place, it was a prophecy of the last century of what did take place in this century, when the Alliance of tlie Reformed Churches holding the Pres- byterian system was founded. Had that been known in 1744 and 1751, it would have solved the union. Let us rejoice that in our day we have what they did not then have, an Alliance which shows the essential unity of his- toric Calvinism, while still perpetuating its distinctive types. Before leaving the subject of union, we must not for- get to note a later attempt to unite the coetus with the Dutch Reformed of New York and New Jersey. That Church had separated in 1755 into two parts, a classis independent of the Holland Church and a conferentie which acknowledged the authority of Holland. In 1767 the classis sent a delegate to the Pennsylvania coetus. Rev. John Leydt. He described the new college started by 488 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. the Dutch in New Jersey, aud asked the aid of the coetus. Coetus in reply declared itself glad to accept the fellow- ship of the Dutch brethren, provided their relation to the Church in Holland was not weakened or prejudiced. It asked the Holland deputies, who were bitterly opposed to the classis, not to think evil of them for approving the college, because of its usefulness in raising up ministers. In the coetus the next year (1768) three members of the Dutch classis were present, Leydt, Hardenberg and Van Harlingen. They made overtures to the coetus for a union. This, if accepted, would compel the coetus to declare itself independent of the Church in Holland. It produced a crisis in the coetus. They spent a whole day on the subject, from early morning till midnight. Never as far as we know did the coetus sit up so late on any sub- ject. Although the discussions about it are not given, yet it is evident that there were some in the coetus who were friendly to union with the Dutch, and to independency of Holland, not because of any difference of doctrine, but for greater liberty. But the coetus finally decided, in view of the great kindness of the Holland Church to them in the past, not to give up submihsion to Hollaud. They, how- ever, opened correspondence with the Dutch classis and appointed delegates to attend it. When the deputies heard of the action of the coetus, they express themselves very much pleased that the coetus would thus remain true to them. ATTEMPTED UNION. 489 Thus failed the attempt to unite the Dutch and German Reformed in America. This movement begun in 1738 (when Boehm attended the preliminary coetus in New York), and continued through 1741-52, and again 1767-68, was the forerunner of later movements in this century — the prophecy, we trust, of a union yet to come. For the close relation of our early German Church to the Dutch in Holland sliould make it easy to unite with the Dutch in America. CHAPTER IV.— SECTION XII. THE NEW MINISTERS. A.— Ministers Sent from Holland. 1748. John Dominicus Charles Bartholomaeus, He was born at Heidelberg and baptized there Decem- ber 13, 1723, in the Catholic church. He attended the university there, matriculating January 15, 1743, and afterward going to Franeker university in Holland. He had changed from Catholicism to Protestantism, for he became a candidate for the Reformed ministry under the classis of Franeker in Holland, September 4, 1747. He applied to the deputies to go to Pennsylvania, October 9, 1747, bringing with him excellent testimonials from the professors at Franeker, and an introduction to them by a recommendation from Kulenkamp of Amsterdam. He was ordained and commissioned by the deputies, Novem- ber 15, 1747. He went to America by way of Loudon, where he was very kindly treated by the Dutch and Ger- man Reformed ministers, who took up a collection of ninety guineas for him and his companion, Hochreutiner, in their churches. It seems that they had spent all their THE NEW MINISTERS. 491 traveling money given by the Holland deputies in London waiting for a ship, they having been deceived by the skip- per who brought them there. They evidently remained in London over the winter and sailed in the spring of 1748, after the season for navigation had opened. In July, 1748, Schlatter received word from DoBois, of New York, that the deputies had sent over two minis- ters, Bartholomaeus and Hochreutiner. On August 13 they arrived at Schlatter's house in Philadelphia. Schlat- ter at once put Bartholomaeus to work. He took him with him to preach at Lancaster, Tulpehocken and Falk- ner Swamp, and the coetus of 1748 assigned him to Tul- pehocken. He was installed there, October 16, 1748. When Hochreutiner shot himself he offered, December 21, 1748, to supply Lancaster one Sunday a month with preaching. The only coetus meeting he attended was 1748. When the coetus of 1749 was held, he was begin- ning to be sick. This sickness increased until insanity set in. At the coetus of 1 752, before he had become fully insane, a request of his was brought, that he be sent back to the Palatinate in the hope that it might bring him back to health again. But the coetus had no money to do this, although some of the members agreed to raise money to aid his journey to his native land. This wish of his was not fulfilled. He became violently insane, threatened his wife, and was brought to Philadelphia to one of the hos- pitals for treatment. The coetus dissolved his pastoral 492 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. relation to Tnlpehocken, August 31, 1752. He was com- mitted to the care of the Reformed pastor in Philadelpliia. The coetus appropriated money to him every year until his death, July 28, 1768, and afterwards gave repeated grants of money to his widow. John Jacob Hochreutiner. He was born at St. Gall, April 27, 1721. He studied there under his father (who was a minister and became rector of the Latin school in 1729), and also under Profes- sor Bartholomew Wegeliu. On December 16, 1743, he was examined for the ministry. He decided to seek ser- vice in the Lord's vineyard elsewhere. Scheitlein* says " he was an earnest and upright youth, but not strong in ability, who recognized his weakness, and soon after his examination sought his fortune in another part of the world." Tliis statement seems to be hardly correct, for he had more ability than that, as his posthumous sermon showed. But Scheitlein is right in saying he sought ser- vice in a foreign land. On May 18, 1747, he left his native town to go to Berbice, in British Guiana in South America, as a private tutor to a German. He remained for a time in London and never got any further. He seems to have gone back to Holland, where he apjieared before the deputies, September, 1747, with testimonials of St. Gall and a recommendation from Kulenkamp. He told * Memorials of J. J, and G. E. Scherer. THE NEW MINISTERS. 493 them he knew Schlatter well. He then appeared before the classis of Amsterdam, October 2, 1747, and before the deputies, October 9, who examined him very carefully. They wanted to see if he was thoroughly Calviuistic, closely questioned him against the Arminians, and decided to locate him at York, They ordained him the same day, Novem- ber 15, 1747, as Bartholomaeus, and gave him money for his traveling expenses. Together they went to London to come to Pennsylvania in 1748. After his arrival here Schlatter took him to preach at Lancaster, Tulpehocken and Falkner Swamp. Thecoetus of 1748 at Schlatter's suggestion assigned him to Lancas- ter as pastor. His untimely death has been previously given.* John Philip Leydich. He was born at Girkhausen in Westphalia, Germany, April 28, 1715, wliere he had been assistant to his father. He appeared before the South Holland synod at its meet- ing at Briel, July 9-19, 1748, with excellent testimonials, and a proper dismissal from his congregation, asking that he might be sent to Pennsylvania. They examined him and found him sound in doctrine, an entire stranger to the Moravianism, and upright in life, and so they appointed him. They then took up a collection for his traveling expenses, which amounted to about forty-six dollars and thirty cents. With his wife and two children he arrived * See Chapter IV., Section IV., page 359. 494 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. at Philadelphia, September 15, 1748, where he was joy- fully received by Schlatter. On the 19th of September, 1748, Boehm, with an elder of his congregation at Falkner Swamp, came to visit Schlatter, aud begged that Leydich might be appointed as regular minister at the above named place and in Provi- dence. It was, however, determined to leave the matter rest until the next meeting ofcoetus, Leydich in the mean- while preaching at both Falkner Swamp and Providence with great acceptance. The coetus approved his call to these congregations, aud Boehm installed him over them immediately after the coetus, October 9, 1748. It is a family tradition, says Dotterer, that when Rev. John Philip Leydich, with his wife and two infant children, for the first time threaded his way through the forest, over the stony road, the vehicle which held them was jolted so violently here that the young wife, accustomed to the com- forts of travel in Europe, burst into tears and besought her husband to forego his purpose to make Falkner Swamp his future homo and the new world his field of labor. The good dominie, however, did not falter, and said cheerily to his helpmeet : " Ei, mamma, ist dieses nicht das gelobte Land " — Dear wife, be not disheartened ; is not this the Promised Land ? He continued serving this charge for a period of thirty-six years. He is the solitary illustration in the coetus where a minister had one charge during his whole life. He had for his col- THE NEW MINISTERS. 495 league and neighbor for many years Muhlenberg at the Trappe, the organizer of the Lutheran Church. During the French and Indian war he joined on July 15, 1757, with other ministers, as Otterbein and the Lutherans, in observing a fast day and taking up a collection in aid of those who were suffering from the Indian invasions. He was president of the coetus, 1751 and 1760, and its secre- tary, 1756 and 1768, and acted as visitor for the coetus in 1760. He complained, 1750, to Holland about his pov- erty, that he received only half his salary, receiving $72, The deputies gave him $40. Although pastor of only one charge, he was full of the missionary spirit. He started congregations at Salzburg and Upper Milford. He revived the congregation at Skippack. He went across the Schuylkill river and preached to the Germans in Chester county at Vincent and Coventry. He continued his labors, although \vith increasing infirmities, until his death, which occurred Jan- uary 4, 1784. His gravestone in Frederick township bears the text 2 Timothy 2:3. " Leydich was a good sol- dier of Jesus Christ." Dr. Harbaugh tells a beautiful story about him. Mrs. Margaret Moser, who died in Mont- gomery county. Pa., at the age of 104 years, was baptized in her infancy and confirmed when fourteen years old by Leydich. Paying a visit to this venerable woman on June 14, 1854, a short time before her death we asked her whether she remembered any of the oldest ministers in this country. 496 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. She remained silent while we repeated the names of a num- ber of them till we mentioned the name of Leydich. Then she threw up her head, her eyes brightened and smiles cov- ered her aged face while she said, " O yes, Leydich, he was a good man." What a tribute to the life and work of a faithful pastor, though little known to fame. The thing that impressed her most was his goodness. He seems to have been a spiritually minded minister and a faithful though quiet laborer in God's vineyard. 1749. John Conbad Steiner. He was born, January 2, 1707, at Wiuterthur, in the canton of Zurich, where his father, Jacob Steiner, was a member of the city council. He entered the ministry when only nineteen years old. He was first vicar at Mettmenstetten in the canton of Zurich for two years (1726-1728). Then he returned to Winterthur. He wrote a book in 1738, entitled " Tlie Midnight Cry," a series of sermons on Christ's second coming, dedicated to the mayor and city council of Winterthur. He was pastor at Hemberg and Peterzell in St. Gall, 1728-1739. In 1739 he became afternoon minister at St. George, near Winter- thur. But his parish was too small and his position sec- ondary. He longed for a larger field for his abilities and usefulness. He, therefore, determined to go to Pennsyl- vania. He went to Holland, where he first met the depu- ties of the North Holland synod, who sent him to the THE NEW MINISTERS. 497 Hague to deputy Pilaat. Steiner asked to be sent to America in Hochreutiner's place. As he brought excel- lent testimonials, and as a ship was to sail for America in a few days, the deputies were hastily called together at the Hague, June 13-14, 1749. They found him well fitted- for the service of God's Church, and specially averse to the Moravian errors. So they appointed him, and he, with his wife and three children, sailed for America. He arrived at Philadelphia, September 25, 1749. His later life is described elsewhere,* so that we simply give the outline of his life here. He was pastor at Philadelphia, 1749-1751, at Germantown, 1749-1756, at Frederick, Md., 1756-1759, and at Philadelphia, 1759-1762. He died, July 6, 1762.t 1752. lu 1752 the Holland deputies sent over six ministers. We begin with Otterbein, who was the most prominent of them, having been a teacher already, and follow with AVissler, as they were already in the ministry before they came to America. Otterbein and Stoy were the strongest of them, Otterbein emphasizing the spiritual, Stoy the intellectual. * See chapter 4, section 6, page 376, and chapter 5, section 2. f In 1752 he published a poem entitled, " The Voice of the Watchman of the Devastated Reformed Zion in Pennsylvania to the Ministers and Watch- men of that Church." It is the longest poem yet published by a Reformed minister. The second part of it is entitled. "An Awakening Voice to the People of Zion in General " There was also a " New Year's Wish" in rhyme addressed to him by John Bemhard Laufersweiler, January 10, 1751, 498 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. Philip William Otterbein. Otterbeio was boru June 3, 1726, at Dillenburg. He had a twin sister, Anna Margaret. His father was Rev. John Daniel Otterbein, a pious and learned man, teacher in the Latin school at Dillenberg up to 1728, when he became pastor at Frohuhausen and Wissenbach, the former about three miles north of Dillenburg. He died Novem- ber 14, 1742. Philip William was at the university of Herborn at the time of his father's death, which left the family without means. His mother removed to Herborn so as to live more economically and also educate her chil- dren. She must have been a noble mother, for she reared a family of ministers, who exerted a powerful influence in the Reformed Church in Germany as well as in this country. Six of her sons entered the ministry. The year after her husband's death (1743) her oldest son received a position as vicar at Ockersdorf and four years later a pastor- ate at Fliesbach. So too Philip William later received an appointment which aided to support the family. He was matriculated, says Drury,* in 1742. Professor Arnoldi felt a special interest in him because he had been a pupil of his father in the Latin school at Dillenburg. Philip William first became a private tutor in the county of Berg, and then teacher (1748) in the school at Herborn. He was examined for the ministry, May 6, 1748, and the next year, as his older brother left the vicariate at Ockersdorf, * Life of Otterbein. THE NEW MINISTERS. 499 he was appointed to it. He was ordained June 13, 1749. Here he preached once every Sunday, and on every first Wednesday of the month and on festival days and held a weekly prayer meeting. It was his mother who fed the missionary spirit within him. She was often heard to say, " My William will have to be a missionary, he is so frank, so open, so natural, so like a prophet." He left Herborn with his mother's bless- ing upon him as she said, taking him by the hand and pressing tliat hand to her bosom, " Go. The Lord bless thee and keep thee." His younger brother, John Charles, was appointed in his place as teacher in the Herborn school while he went to distant America. No wonder that Mr. Otterbein requested as early as March 31, 17§2, that fifty gulden be every year taken from his share of the amount sent by Holland to Pennsylvania, and that it be sent to his mother. He was as good a son as she was a mother. On his departure he was given a beau- tiful academic testimonial by Professor Arnoldi, Febru- ary 26, 1752, and by Professor Schramm two days later. He appeared before the deputies at the Hague, March 9, 1752, and was solemnly appointed, March 14, for Penn- sylvania. He arrived at New York with Schlatter the night before July 28, 1752, and entered on his duties as pastor at Lancaster, August, 1752, engaging himself to that congregation for five years. At once his congrega- tion, which had had such a succession of reverses, revived, 500 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. and the next year they replaced the log church built 1736 with a uew stone church. In 1755 coetus made him sup- ply of Reading, also of Conewago. During his ministry at Lancaster a great spiritual change took place in him, which led to a higher consecration to his Savior. One day after he had preaclied an earnest sermon on repentance and faith, a man smitten with conviction came to him for advice. He knew not how to answer, but sought his closet and wrestled with the Lord till peace came. But he was not satisfied with his people, and said he would never again accept a call for a stipulated number of years. He was disheartened at the lack of spirituality and carelessness of church discipline. At the close of his engagement with them in 1757 he was anxious to withdraw from their pas- torate. But his congregation was unwilling. They were ready to promise him anything so as to keep him. They agreed to strict church discipline as he asked. The coetus interceded with him to stay, and he acceded to their request with the privilege of resigning at any time he saw fit. He remained at Lancaster and established a custom that the pastor should have a personal interview with each com- municant before he came to the Lord's Supper, a custom which continued there for three quarters of a century. This custom was an old one in the Reformed districts along the Northern Rhine, as the diary of Prof. F. A. Lampe, pastor at Duisburg, abundantly shows, THE NEW MINISTERS. 501 Otterbein remained another year at Lancaster, and then resigned with the intention of returning to Europe to visit his relatives. But the severe winter and the dangers of sea travel during the war with France led him to tempor- arily give up his trip, and he accepted as a supply the Tulpehocken charge, which he served for two years. While there he began, as he had done at Lancaster, to hold prayer meetings. He would read Scripture, make remarks, and then after the hymn was sung, they would all kneel and have prayer. At first only a few would offer prayers, so he often had to do it alone, but the number of those who took part gradually increased. Drs. Drury and Spayth, his biographers in the United Brethren Church, seem to think that he was introducing a new custom, but he was not. He was only reproducing a very common custom among the Reformed of the Northern Rhine.* But he was perhaps the first to introduce such prayer meetings as a regular service of the church into America. In other places they had been held perhaps in times of revival or calamity, but his were held regularly. In 17(30 he accepted a call to the congregation at Fred- erick, Maryland. Here the Lord again greatly blessed him, and he built a stone church in 1763. It seems that some of the congregation objected to his earnest methods and locked the church. So he mounted one of the tomb- stones in the cemetery and preached with such great power * See my History of the Reformed Church of Germany. 502 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. that the person who had the key could stand it no longer and delivered up the key. He not merely preached at Frederick, but all through Maryland and down into Vir- ginia. Coetus says he almost worked himself to death. He published " The Incarnation which brings salvation and the glorious victory of Jesus Christ over the devil and death," a sermon preached in the Reformed church of Ger- mantown in the year 1760. In 1763 the Philadelphia congregation made overtures to him to call him, while they were still having their controversy with Rothenbuh- ler, and they finally did call him. But he felt he could not leave Frederick just then, so they called Weyberg. He remained at Frederick five years, during which time he was called to Reading, 1761, but refused, and also to Goshenhoppen, 1762. In 1765 he accepted a call to York, although the elder from Frederick declared to coetus that there was great need for a minister at Frederick on account of the great number of convicted and awakened sinners — the eflPect of his earnest preaching. After he left Freder- ick the congregation kept up their own services, even though they had no pastor, for he had trained the spiritu- ally minded ones to hold prayer meetings. His successor, Lange, was a man of a very different type, who derided prayer meetings, but coetus in 1767 decided against him and for Otterbein. While he was pastor at York he took iiis long intended trip to Europe. He left York in April, 1770. He THE NEW MINISTERS. 503 appeared before the commissioners of the classis of Am- sterdam, August, 1770, on his way to his former home at Herborn. Great must have been the joy of his aged mother and of his five brothers in the Reformed ministry to see him again. His most ^prominent brother, George Godfrey, the author of an excellent commentary on the Heidelberg Catechism, 1803, and the standard bearer of the Reformed against the oncoming tide of rationalism in Germany, was pastor at Duisburg. When they met Wil- liam detailed the story of his spiritual awakening at Lan- caster. George Godfrey listened v/ith deepest emotion, and rising from his chair, embraced his brother as tears streamed down his cheeks, saying, " My brother, dear William, we are now, blessed be the name of the Lord, not only brothers after the flesh, but also after the Spirit. I have also experienced the same blessing." He left Her- born in February, 1771, on his return to Pennsylvania, and arrived safely at York, October, 1771. He continued pastor at York till 1774, when he accepted a call to Balti- more, which will be described later. But Otterbein all through his ministry emphasized the spiritual. He seems to have been the most sought for as pastor by the congre- gations, and liis influence in the coetus was very great. He was president of the coetus in 1757 and also in 1766. Stahlschmidt says of him : " He is a very gentle and friendly man, and because of his pious, godly manner of life was highly esteemed throughout the land." 504 the german reformed church in u. s. John Jacob Wissler. He was born at Dillenburg, February 23, 1727. He was the son of Earnest Wissler, the chamber servant of the commander of Spina. He was baptized, March 3, 1727. He attended Herbofn University, and had been ordained before Schlatter visited Herborn. He was the only one of the six young men who came with Schlatter who was married. He was appointed to the Egypt charge, near Allentown. He made his first entry in the church record on September 24, 1752. In the Schlatter- Weiss controversy he sympathized from the beginning strongly with Weiss and against Schlatter, to whom he took an aversion on his way over the ocean. He did not, however, live very long. He died between Easter, 1754, when he confirmed his last class of catechumens, and Oct. 30, 1754, when the coetus speaks of him as dead, and gives 10 pounds to his widow. Theodore Frankenfeld. He was born at Herborn, November 25, 1727, and was the son of Nicolas Herbert Frankenfeld, treasurer of the town of Herborn. He studied at Herborn, where he entered the fifth class of the Latin school, April 26, 1736, and, April 27, 1741, the second class. After his arrival in America he was assigned to the Frederick, Maryland, charge. But although he arrived in Pennsylvania in the fall of 1752, he did not arrive at Frederick until May, THE NEW MINISTERS. 505 1753, on account of high water. Schlatter then accom- panied him and installed him there. He was present each year at the coetus up to June 15, 1756, when his name disappears. His records in the baptismal book at Frederick also stop about that date, October, 1756, so that he was probably too ill to attend the coetus, and he died that year. Lischy praises him in a letter to Hol- land, " that he was ever ready for good counsel, and had won all hearts in his congregation by his peaceful dispo- sition. Steubing, one of the historians of the Keformed Church of Nassau in Germany, tells the story that Frank- enfeld sent for his mother to come to America. She started with her children, one of whom was a student, but the ship on which they sailed was shipwrecked, and they all were lost. John Casper Rubel. He was born at Wald, in the county of Berg, in the region of the northern Rhine, and matriculated May 20, 1737, at Marburg University. Stoy says Rubel had also been educated at Herborn. His attention was called to Pennsylvania by the Appeal published by Schlatter. When he applied to the deputies, he was a member of the classis of Solingen, along the northern Rhine, and his church membership was given as at Friemersheim. He was examined, April 6, 1752, and gave evidences of abil- ity and of Reformed orthodoxy, and, like the other young men who came with Schlatter, he subscribed the Holland 506 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. creeds. His later controversy with Schlatter has already been given.* Henry William Stoy. He was born on March 14, 1726, at Herborn, the youngest son of John George Stoy, a tailor at Herborn. He studied at Herborn, 1741, and became a candidate of theology, September 15, 1749. With the other four young men from Nassau he went with Schlatter to Hol- land, where, with Waldschmidt and Frankenfeld, he was examined by the deputies and excelled in the examina- tion. He was ordained for the work in Pennsylvania, March 14, 1752. After his arrival in America he was assigned to Tulpehocken. During his stay at Tulpe- hocken he was not well, being aifected by the fevers inci- dent to new settlements, and he seriously thought of returning to Europe again. But the coetus of 1756 assigned him to Philadelphia as a supply, and his health improved, so he wrote to the Holland deputies, Septem- ber 30, 1757, that he had finally decided to remain in Pennsylvania. He would have been well able to sustain himself in the Philadelphia congregation, for he had suffi- cient ability. But his unfortunate marriage with " a stocking weaver's daughter," the daughter of Frederick Mans, one of his members, caused a good deal of dissatis- faction in the congregation, although his elders stood by * See Chapter IV., Section VIII., page 412. THE NEAV MINISTERS. 507 him. The deputies requested him in 1757 to remain until they could send some one to fill his place at Philadelphia. He resigned and went to Lancaster in October, 1758. During these years he acted as clerk of coetus and wrote long; Latin letters to the Holland fathers. In them he was very severe against Steiner and his acceptance of the Philadelphia congregation after Stoy left. Indeed, the Holland deputies think he was rather too severe in his language against Steiner. He resigned at Lancaster in January, 1763. At Lancaster he revealed a good deal of activity, thus in seven months up to May, 1760, he had baptized one hundred and received forty into the Church by profession of faith. He also preached at Pequea once a month. He resigned from Lancaster in January, 1763, and went back to Europe. He arrived in Holland before May 19, 1763, when he came into contact with the commission- ers of the classis of Amsterdam. He went to Herborn and studied medicine privately under Professor John Adam Hoffman. The classis of Amsterdam reported that he attended their meeting. May 3, 1763. It has been stated that he studied at Leyden, but the matriculation books do not reveal his presence there. On November 5, 1767, he wrote to Holland that he had returned to Pennsylvania, that he had several calls, but concluded to accept Tulpe- hockcn (the present Host church). He, however com- plained that the coetus would not recognize him as a mem- 508 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. ber, and appeals to the deputies and the classis to compel them to do so. The deputies inquired in 1 770 of the coetus why Stoy was not reported as a member of the coetus. In their minutes of the coetus, October, 1771, they reply that they might wish to have him a member, but they were not able to do so, and they think his membership would cause more injury than good among them. Indeed they charge him with having been a stirrer up of strife before. (We suppose they refer to his quarrel with Steiner.) The depu- ties were, however, not satisfied with this explanation, and again wrote to the coetus, expressing their desire that he be received as a member. The coetus replied to this as before, but added that he had been a cause of strife among them before, and that that year, just before a meeting of the coetus, he had attacked the coetus in a public paper in an article, and he had sent a circular to all the ministers filled with sharp thrusts. (He seems, however, to have left the Host church by 1773, for that congregation applies to coetus for a minister.) He accused coetus of conspiring against the liberty of the members, and thus he fostered an independent spirit iu the church.* " It is said," says Rev. Dr. Dubbs, " that he preached iu white clothes for fear of being mistaken for the blackcoats (ministers)." He was an independent Reformed minister the rest of his life. After he left the coetus he seems to have gone into * He did not origiiuite this independent spirit, as Ilarbaugh says, for it was in the Church long before, as in the case of Goetschi and his successors. THE :new ministers. 509 politics in addition to his practise of medicine. In 1779, dnring the Revolution, be published a letter addressed to Joseph Reed, president of the supreme executive council of Pennsylvania, on " The Present Mode of Taxation." It was dated December 17, 1779.* Stoy has the honor of being the first single tax man in this country, although he meant by single tax something different from what is meant now. Still he gave great prominence to land in his system. Stoy, however, thought himself to be a states- man, and allowed himself to be elected a member of the Pennsylvania legislature in 1784. He wrote frequently on political subjects for the newspapers. But he was most prominent as a physician, and was everywhere known as Dr. Stoy. He discovered a famous cure for hydrophobia, still known by his name. He also prepared a popular medicine known as Stoy's drops. He also was active in introducing the system of inoculation * He prefaced this by objecting very strenuously to a man taking an oa,th, which was really against himself, and thus raising the tax. His plan was to have all the property, whether real estate, houses or factories, put into different classes. (Young men should not be taxed, but instead should attend to militia duty.) The taxation should be divided into different classes. The single tax was what the state would ordinarily need for its expenses. When, however, there was an unusual expense, the double tax could be assessed, or, if necessary, the triple. But every man would be assessed according to the valuation of his properties above made, which would always be the same. This, he said, would save the use of assessors, an office always likely to be abused. It would have the advantage of an eternal law of taxation. Each man could then go, of his own accord, yearly and pay his taxes, as he always knew what they were. This is a very beautiful theory, but not practicable, because the values of properties are continually changing. 510 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. for small pox, although there was a great deal ofprejiuliee against this as an effort to thwart providence. He was very fond of hunting, and when he would cross the Blue Mountains to preach, he would go on a Friday so as to spend Saturday in shooting. As he was a fine marksman he had much success. He strongly sympathized with the patriots in the Revolution, was greatly interested in natural sciences, and spent much of his time in preaching against the Deists. We fear it was more apologetical tlian evan- gelistic. He tried to train one of his sons to be a Nazar- ite, — to let his hair grow, to abstain from drink, and not to attend a funeral or go where there was a corpse. He thought that thereby the son would grow up as strong as a Samson. But he did not succeed in this. He died at Lebanon, September 14, 1801, and was buried at the Host church. A good criticism of his preaching was made by the Moravians in the diary of the Hebron church near Lebanon : " In his sermons he is very philosophical, deep and expatiating, which obscures and taints even the evan- gelical doctrines, which he at times propounds." He was a kind son, as he ordered the deputies repeatedly to send part of his salary to his parents, 1754. He was probably the first member of the coetus to begin the instruction privately of young men for the ministry, apian afterwards pursued by Hendel, Weyberg and others with great suc- cess. In 1756 he began giving lessons to a young man named Bonner, and the coetus acts of 1757 say Bonner is THE NEW MINISTERS. 511 still " courting the Muses" under Stoy. The deputies grant their permission to this provided it does not interfere with his pastoral work. John Waldsciimidt. He was born at Dillenburg, August 6, 1724, a son of John Henry Waldschmidt. He studied at Herborn Uni- versity. His opportunities for an education were limited, he having obtained a chance for it only after being twenty years of age. Hence he was perhaps less well educated than the rest who came over with him. He went with Schlatter to Holland, where he was examined and ordained by the deputies, March 14, 1752. On his arrival in Penn- sylvania Schlatter, who had decided to remain in the Philadelphia congregation, expected to keep Waldschmidt with him as his assistant, but the opposition of that con- gregation to Schlatter's return as pastor prevented this from being carried out. So he was assigned to the Muddy Creek charge. At the coetus of October 18, 1752, he asked what he was to do about the independent Reformed minister, Frederick Casimir Miller, who disturbed his charge. Coetus told him to go on preaching, as nothing else could be done until the Lord took this hindrance out of the way. After Stoy left Tulpehocken, he was appointed to supply his charge and also Reading. He wrote to the deputies, November 22, 1752, very bitterly warning them against the coetus for ordaining uneducated men (he prob- ably referred to the case of his neighbor, Tempelman, whp 512 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. had preached at Muddy Creek before him). In 1756, September 13, he ordered the deputies to pay 100 gulden of the money sent to Pennsylvania to his mother for his education. But by 1760 some complaints begin to come in to coetus against him that he was not diligent in house visitation. In 1763 he preached at Berne and Cacusi. He seems to have left Muddy Creek by 1770, and in 1771 Heidelberg church, Berks county, brought complaints against his ministry for slowness and negligence, and so the love of the congregations had grown cold, and he left. He continued to serve some congregations in eastern Lan- caster county, as Swamp, and in western Berks county until his death, September 14, 1786. A curious incident occurred several years later. On Sunday, June 2, 1793, while a large congregation at the Swamp church, Lancas- ter county, where he was buried, was engaged in worship, suddenly the tombstone of Waldschmidt broke off at the top of the ground and fell flat on his tomb. The wonder was increased because his widow, who had become insane long before and had not spoken a word for years, began to speak on that day. B.— Ministers Raised up by the Coetus. John Conrad Tempelman. He was not really a new minister, as he was one of the first preachers in Pennsylvania, still, as he was not received into the coetus till 1752, we place him here. His earlier THE NEW MINISTERS. 513 ministry lias been previously given.* He attended the coetus of 1749 as a candidate for the ministiy. The depu- ties, while Schlatter was in Holland, ordered his ordina- tion. And when Schlatter returned to Pennsylvania, Terapelman was examined by the coetus of 1752, passing an unusually good examination in the sciences. He was ordained by Schlatter at that meeting of coetus, October 21, 1752. He enlarged his field, preaching at Swatara. He was present at the coetus of 1753, 1754 and 1755. In 1757 he is absent because of defective eyesight, on account of which he is no longer able to serve his congregations. In 1760 he is reported stone-blind, and preaching seldom, and in his own house. Some of the aged members of the Swamp church remember seeing him led up into the pulpit to preach after he was blind. It is said he spent his last years with his sister, Mrs. Brunner, and died about 1761. He was buried about four miles southeast of Lebanon at a place called Tempelman's Hill, near which he used to live. He was a pious man and did excellent work for the Church, and he still lives in blessed memory in the churches around Lebanon. Jonathan DuBois. We know nothing of his early life except that he was educated for the ministry under Dorsius and two Presby- terian ministers. When a young man he together with David Marinus (who afterwards went into the Dutch Re- * See page 108. 33 514 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. formed Church as pastor at Aquackanonck and Pompton Plains) appeared before Schlatter, October 28, 1748, and asked whether he could be examined by coetus for the ministry. Unfortunately the coetus for that year had just closed its session, and so he had to wait till the next year. In 1752 the deputies decided favorably, and when the coetus of 1752 met, he with Tempelman was examined, and he excelled in the languages. He was ordained, Oc- tober 21, by Schlatter as president. He had before this acted as Schlatter's amanuensis, and in copying his early journal, assisted him as much as seven times. It is also likely that during the meantime he acted as a supply of Dorsius' vacant congregation, to which he was afterward called as pastor. In the controversies which afterward followed in the coetus, he was ever the devoted friend of Schlatter. He suggested at the coetus of 1756 that, like the Presbyterians, four days be kept as days of fasting and prayer in view of the Indian wars. In 1758 he asked to be dismissed to the coetus of New York, giving as a reason that he could not understand the German language, and that especially his elders found it difficult to understand it at th^ coetus. He seems to have changed his mind, for he remained in the coetus until his death. In 1762 he was made president of the coetus. At the coetus of 1772 he presented the claims of the new col- lege in New Jersey started by the Dutch Reformed, and asked that it be recommended to the congregations, THE NEW MINISTERS. 515 which was done. He died before the coetus held October 27, 1773, as it speaks of his death. His congregation afterwards called a pastor for the Dutch coetus of New York and left the Pennsylvania coetus, and has ever since been a part of the Dutch Reformed Church of America. CHAPTER IV.— SECTION XIII. THE INDEPENDENTS. . Frederick Casimir Miller. He was from Stetichein, near Mayeuce, where he had been school-teacher. He came to America before 1744. Schlatter found him as a school-teacher at Gosheuhoppen, where he had been teaching and preaching before Weiss returned from New York state, and he gave Weiss a great deal of trouble in his field. Schlatter says he was the only one of the independent ministers who had not expressed a wish to submit himself to the Holland Church. Indeed he antagonized the Holland Church. He had about ten or a dozen small congregations in and around Oley. And in New Goshenhoppen about eighteen heads of families were with him, while Weiss had thirty. Miller traveled around during the week trying to prejudice the German people against Schlatter and the Church of Holland by saying that if they submitted to it they would give up their free- dom and come into intolerable bondage. Schlatter had him come to him, September 23, 1746, at Oley, and in the presence of Weiss proposed that he allow the Holland synods to have him ordained if he would submit to them, and then be regularly installed as pastor of a charge. The THE INDEPENDENTS. 517 condition was that he no longer administer the sacraments or perform marriages nntil Schlatter had gained the sanc- tion of the Holland deputies. Miller seems to have agreed to this, but the next Sunday he broke the agreement by baptizing, and by announcing that in four weeks he would administer the Lord's Supper. On October 19, 1746, Schlatter tried to induce his adherents at New Goshenhop- pen to come over to Weiss, but in vain. Schlatter reported Miller's continued opposition to the Holland deputies, who praised him for his perseverance in holding " the obstrep- erous Miller" in check. When Miller, however, found that the coetus had split into two sections in 1753, he made application to the party, which favored more independence in the Church, and was led by Weiss and Steiner, to be received as a member of the coetus. It is to the credit of this coetus of 1753 that they refused to grant his request, because he was uuordained and led an offensive life. He, therefore, never became a member of the coetus. He ded- icated the Longswamp Reformed church in September, 1748. He was in Oley, according to Lutheran records, in 1764.* Philip Jacob Michael. He was a different sort of a man from the preceding. He was born 1716, and was a weaver by trade. He began * There was a Frederick Miller preaching at Lebanon, who is mentioned in the diary of the Moravian church as a pious man. Hs could hardly have been Frederick Casimir Miller, whose offensive life caused coetus to refuse him. 518 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. preaching without ordination. On July 29, 1750, he became pastor of Ziegel's congregation, Lehigh county, and dedicated their church at that time. His records on the church book reveal him to be a man of very ordinary edu- cation. Still he had a good character, and })lain country people said of him, " He preaches well." He became pastor of Heidelberg congregation in 1744, when he dedi- cated the first church for the Keformed, and the Reformed made a contract with the Lutherans, March 28, 1745, which he signed for the Reformed. His predecessor there had been Andrew Steiger, the school-master of Lynntown, who used to come and hold religious services in the houses. He succeeded Frederick Casimir Miller at Longswamp, and was pastor there till 1753. He again became pastor there from 1763 to the end of 1774, and, when Helffrich left, again in 1780. He was pastor of the Ebcnezer con- gregation, 1760-1770. (This congregation was also called the Organ congregation, because it had a small organ.) He was pastor of Weissenberg, 1761-1770, after Kidcn- weiler had left. He preached at Lowhill, September 3, 1769-1772, though he never was pastor of the church, only preaching occasionally. He founded the Jacobs con- gregation. It seems he appealed to Schlatter to be examined and received into the coetus, but Schlatter not only refused, but made no report of it to Holland, or gave his reasons for it. After Schlatter had left the coetus, he again applies THE INDEPENDENTS. 519 to them in 1764, asking that he be admitted and stating tliat he had been pastor for fourteen years of the congre- gations in Maxatawny, and that he served twelve congre- gations. Coetus communicated his request to Holland and urged that he be received, but the deputies refused. The classis decided that he be compelled to come to Holland for ordination, as did the deputies, which of course was impossible. As he was becoming aged he did not press his application to coetus, and his congregations were satis- fied that he should continue preaching without ordination. He became chaplain of the American Army in the Rev- olution, being appointed May 17, 1777. He did a quiet but good work and did not antagonize the coetus. How- ever, in his later years he injured the church by ordaining with his own hand and alone Cyriacus Spangenberg, the adventurer, to whom coetus had refused ordination. The St. Michael's church in upper Berks county is said to be named after him, says Rev. Dr. Helffrich in his " History of the Congregations in Lehigh and Berks Counties," from whom many of the facts concerning Michael and the other independents here named are taken. Michael lived between Longswarap and DcLong's church on a knob still called " Michael's Knob." John Rudolph Kidenweiler (Kittweiler). Unlike the last two named he was a regularly ordained Reformed minister, and evidently was an acceptable preacher. He was born, January 2, 1717. He came to 520 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. Pennsylvania from Basle, and, like Lischy, was known among the people as the Swiss preacher. He qualified in Philadelphia, September 28, 1749. He went with the Swiss colony to Swiss Erick, at the upper end of Lehigh county, and preached to his countrymen for a time in the houses, and then, in 1750, he founded the Weissenburg congregation. He also served the Little Lehigh congre- gation after 1754, but left both of them, November, 1761, because of a controversy between him and the cougreg-a- tion, with, however, nothing dishonorable to himself. He had been called by middle of May, 1756, to the Long- swamp congregation. In 1759 he built the Salzburg church, with George Weber, Christian Liess and Conrad Jacobi as Reformed elders. He preached at Longswamp for seven years and six months. He was called in 1763 to Great Swamp and preached there for about one year, when he died there, October 2, 1764. John Henry Decker. John Henry Decker became pastor of the Cacusi church in Berks county in 1751. There is a John Henry Decker, who (pialified at Philadelpliia, Scj)tember 14, 1751. He was pastor at Cacusi a second time, 1753-1755, and in 1759 was taxed six pounds. John Egidius Hecker. John Egidius Hecker was born at Dillenburg, January 26, 1726, the son of the ducal attendant, John Wigand Hecker. He (qualified at Philad('lj)liia, September 23, THE INDEPENDENTS. 521 1751, and preached without ordination. He applied to the coetus of 1752, recommended by Waldschmidt, but the coetus replied that it had not authority to ordain hira, and admonished him not to preach, as he had not been ordained. As he came from Nassau, he had probably been acquainted with Nassau young men who (!ame over with Schlatter in 1752. He preached at Tohickon and Lower Saucon. In 1758 he opened the church record at Upper Milford, where he continued until 1706, when he retired. Jacob Reiss. Jacob Reiss was born on April 10, 1706. He was pastor at Indian Field, 1749-1753, and pastor at Goshen- hoppen after Weiss' death up to 1766. He died, Decem- ber 23, 1774, and was buried at Tohickon. John Casper Lapp. He was born at Windecken, a little town a few miles north of Hanau, where his father, Francis Lapp, was a physician. He was educated at Hanau, Offenbach and Marburg. He matriculated at Hanau gymnasium, July 27, 1740, and closed his course by going to Marburg, where he matriculated, April 16, 1744. He was ordained to the office of teacher (preacher) by order of the king of Sweden (who then ruled Hanau) at Marburg, December 20, 1744. He then served the charge at Neukirchen up to January 10, 1746, faithfully and well they say in their dismissal of him. He was then assistant to an old minis- 522 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHTJRCn IN U. S. ter named Daniel Seel, in the county of Sayn Hachenburg, and after his death served five villages. Bnt the position was sold through simony to another man, and so he had to leave. He became assistant minister at Rabenschied, where he labored four years, during which time he vicari- ated a year and a half at the court of the countess' mother of Dillenburg during the vacancies of the court preachers. He was then called to a charge in the district of Solms Hohenzollern for four years, where he became mixed up in a disturbance so that his life was threatened. He then became pastor at Niederweissel, in the Wetterau district. Their letter of April 29, 1753, says that they were well satisfied with him and wanted him to remain, but the salary was too small. He was led to tliink of Pennsvlvania through the five young ministers whom Schlatter took from that district. So he started for Rotterdam with his wife and two chil- dren. He arrived there, June 19, 1753, intending to pre- sent himself to the deputies to be sent to America. But as he found a vessel just about sailing on tlie 21st, without waiting to meet them he sailed. He lauded sick at Pliila- delphia, October 2, 1753, with a wife and boy three years of age, evidently having lost a child on the way. He then discovered the mistake he had made in not appearing before the deputies, and being properly sent to Pennsylvania. However, Rubel welcomed him and succeeded in getting him into the charge at Amwell, N. J. He had been called THE INDEPENDENTS. 523 before to Rhinebeck, N. Y., but had refused, as he did uot think the place suitable. He says he was the first to give Am well regular preaching, as before it had been served only a few times a year by ministers from Philadelphia. In the Rubel controversy he wrote to Holland in favor of Rubel and against Schlatter. He seems to think that Schlatter had probably not mentioned this congregation to Holland. In this he is mistaken. But he tells the story about Schlatter, that on one occasion for trivial causes he ran out of the pulpit, declaring he would not preach any more. But after a half or a quarter of an hour he came back again and preached. But the majority had left the church. Lapp says he was installed over his congregation by Frelinghuysen, of the Raritan. He wrote a very earnest appeal to the deputies in April 1, 1756, asking for financial aid, as his salary was small. They replied to him that as they had no money they would not be able to help him, although they sympathized with him. He was one upon whom Rubel relied to build a new coetus. CHAPTER V. THE COETUS UP TO THE REVOLUTION. SECTION I. THE REFORMED IN CIVIL AFFAIRS. The Reformed played an important part in the making of America, althongli their share in it has been forgotten, as they have not blown their trnmpets as londly as sonie other denominations. Nevertheless their work is becoming more generally recognized. Although fears were expressed by the British about the Germans of Pennsylvania, lest they might join the French in case of a war between Eng- land and France, yet the Germans never thought of such a thing. They were too thankful to England for offering an asylum to them from their persecutions, and they had been foes of France too long to join them. When they arrived at Pennsylvania they qualified or took the oath of allegiance to the king of England. When Morris was appointed governor of Pennsylvania, the Reformed minis- ters of the coetus presented him, November 2, 1754, a memorial, assuring him of their adherence to the king. It was signed by Waldschmidt, Frankenfeld, DuBois, Tem- pelman, Steiner, Schlatter, Rieger, Weiss, Leydich, Lischy, THE REFORMED IN CIVIL AFFAIRS. 525 Otterbein and Stoy. On November they with all the Ger- mans presented a memorial to him, among whose signers were a number of Reformed. Morris replied to this that he would try to stop the rumors afloat about their defection to France, and promised to protect them to the best of his ability. When the French and Indian war broke out the Ger- mans were a most important element in Pennsylvania for the British. For the Quakers opposed war, and the bnmt of it fell on the Germans, who were settled largely along the borders. They sprang to arms. During the war the border congregations suffered a good deal, as the charges at Easton, on the Lehigh, Lynn, Tulpehocken, Frederick, Md., and Winchester, Va. Steiner in his letter of 1757 says he visited the Reformed around AVinchester and noted how they were afraid to attend religious services, and had deserted their homes and lived in miserable forts for pro- tection. He preached at a certain place where a month before seven had been killed by Indians and fourteen car- ried away captive. Stoy in his letter of September 30, 1757, says that most of the inhabitants of the Tulpehocken district had either fled or been killed or taken prisoners. The Indians, he says, were more savage than wolves, tigers or lions. He says we have lost some of our congregations partly or wdiolly. The place where Wissleif labored along the Lehigh was pillaged and robbed of its inhabitants. The Ebenezer congregation in Lehigh county suffered very 526 THE GEEMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. much because the Indian trail passed the mountains near it. Some there in fleeing, like the Zeissloif family, were murdered. Often the men of the house went to bed ^vith a loaded gun and an axe by their bedside to defend them- selves if necessary, says Helifrich. On July 15, 1757, there appeared an appeal in the Philadelphia Zeitung for funds for the people along the borders who were impover ished by war. Among the signers ready to receive dona- tions were Leydich and Otterbein. The Reformed con- gregation at Providence held a day of confession of sin and of fasting because of the war, and took up a collection for the sufferers. The coetus of 1757, at the suggestion of DuBois, following the example of the Presbyterians, appointed four days that year as days of fasting and prayer in view of the war. But the most interesting public character among the Reformed of this period was Colonel Henry Lewis Bou- quet. He was the most prominent Reformed officer before the Revolution — the ^yashington of the age before Wash- ington. He was born at Rolle, in southern Switzerland, in 1719, and educated at Lausanne. He united with the Reformed churcli of his native place, March 25, 1735. The next year, at the age of seventeen, he entered the Dutch service as a cadet of the regiment of Constant, and in two years rose to the rank of ensign. He then entered the service of the king of Sardinia, where he distinguished himself as lieutenant and adjutant. His reports, so clear, THE REFORMED IN CIVIL AFFAIRS. 527 scientific and truthful, attracted the attention of the prince of Orange, who won him back to the Dutch service and made him (1748) lieutenant colonel in a regiment of the Swiss guards at the Hague. But peace having been declared, he a few months later in company with an Eng- lish nobleman. Lord Middleton, made a tour through France and Italy. Returning to the Hague he continued his mathematical and military studies with great success. When the French and Indian war broke out in America, England decided to raise a corps called the royal Americans (of four battalions having each a thousand soldiers), com- posed of the foreign settlers. Bouquet was appointed lieu- tenant colonel, and sailed for America in 1756. Here Bouquet took part in two expeditions against the Indians, both in Pennsylvania against Fort Pitt or Pitts- burg. The first was the expedition under General Forbes, sent out in 1758. Bouquet commanded the first division and Washington the second. Washington wanted to go by the old Braddock route, so as to favor Virginia land interests. Bouquet, looking at it from a strategic stand- point, wanted a new and direct route. Forbes decided for Bouquet's plan. Forbes was carried on a litter through the campaign and died soon after. The French abandoned Fort Pitt. In 1763 Bouquet was again sent in command of an expedition to relieve Fort Pitt, surrounded by Indians. It was generally expected that this expedition would meet 528 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. the fate of Braddock. If he had been defeated, it would have left Pennsylvania at the mercy of the Indians. He started out with about five hundred British soldiers, many of them sick, so that sixty had to be carried in wagons. By July 25 he had reached Fort Bedford on the frontier. Then he pushed westward, and at the defile of the Turtle Creek he was (August 5) most fiercely attacked by the enemy. His soldiers were wearied by a seventeen mile march. But they quickly formed a hollow square, in which they placed their wagons and horses. A running fire was kept up the rest of the day. The next morning with a thousand yells the Indians rushed in on all sides on them. The soldiers were suffering terribly from thirst, but fought bravely. A desperate effort had to be made to save the army. Bouquet then pretended to retreat, and thus drew the Indians into an ambuscade, in which they received so deadly a charge from the regulars that they fled in haste. Thus what threatened to be a Braddock's defeat became a Bouquet's victory. For this victory at Bushy Run he was publicly thanked by the assembly of Pennsylvania, and the king promoted him to be a brigadier general. Bouquet having captured Fort Pitt, carried the campaign into Ohio, where he broke up the dangerous Pontiac conspiracy. He became the idol of the foreign population of Pennsylvania. An officer wrote to him that the peo})le rejoiced more at his promotion than if the gov- THE REFORMED IN CIVIL AFFAIRS. 529 erument had repealed the stamp act.* No name was more fondly cherished by the Germans of that time than his, for by his victory he had saved many of them from the toma- hawk of the Indians. Perhaps his most delightful duty was to gather back from the Indians those who had been taken captive. A^ery touching were the scenes at Carlisle, where the parents and friends came to seek for the lost. One of these, Regina Hartman, was led to recognize her mother by the latter's singing the familiar German hymn "Alone, yet not alone am I/' which she had heard in her girlhood before captivity. Bouquet bought a tract of 400 acres near Hagerstown, Md., intending to colonize it with Swiss and Germans, when he was sent to Pensacola by the British government to defend it against the Indians. He arrived there, August 23, 1765, but soon fell a victim of yellow fever and died, September 2, 1765. Had he lived Washington would have had to look out for his laurels. It has been suggested : that the British government sent him south because with ' his military fame and republican antecedents in Switzer- I land, he might become a leader of the discontented in the colonies. But this is not likely, as he died so long before the Revolution. But there is no question Avhere he would have stood had he lived. Swiss love of freedom prepared I for American battle for freedom. And as he would have * Dr. William Smith published A historical Account of his Expedition against the Ohio Indians in 1761, which gained him great popularity in Eng- land. 34 530 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. been an officer senior to Washington, with larger fame and experience, he might proba|)ly have been elected general of the armies of the Revolution, and thus have become the hero of the Revolution and the father of his country.* * See the excellent monographs by Rev. C. Cort, D. D., " The Enoch Brown Monument Dedication," Lancaster, 188(), and "Colonel Henry Bou- quet and his Campaigns," Lancaster, 1883. Also his articles in the Reformed Church Magazine for June and July, 1894. CHAPTER v.— SECTION II. THE PHILADELPHIA CONGREGATION. Schlatter and liubel liaviug both left the Philadelphia congregation, it was hoped that peace would come. But now the congregation began to experience a difficulty in finding a suitable pastor. Steiner supplied the congrega- tion with preaching for some time. Meanwhile the depu- ties in Holland tried to find a minister for this important church. They thought they had found a suitable person in Rev. Christopher Muntz.* He was appointed by the deputies, October 29, 1754, to go to Pennsylvania. It seems, however, that contrary to the deputies' expectations he did not start for America till April, 1755, because he had been sick. Then he went to London, where he was aided by the Charity society for the Germans. He then sailed, but died on the voyage to America, so that the hopes of the congregation for him as pastor were dis- appointed. Since the deputies had failed to supply the pulpit in Philadelphia with a pastor, the coetus of 1756 felt itself called upon to do so, and requested Stoy to act as supply, * He had been licensed in 1729 and appointed chaplain of a Westerwald regiment, July 1, 1734- He bad been pastor at Neukirchen, 1750-1754. 532 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. as he was inclined to leave Tulpehocken, because he had been ill, and also because of the Indian incursions in that district. The congregation accepted him by the year. He had the ability to sustain himself there, but his unfor- tunate marriage caused quite a strong party to be formed in the congregation against him, although the elders of the congregation desired to retain him. He left and went to Lancaster, October, 1758, and the congregation was again without a pastor. Many of them had desired to have Al- sentz, who had lately arrived from Europe, and who was pastor at Germantown, but he declined because of the dis- sensions among them. It happened that a Dutch minister, John William Kals, had arrived at Philadelphia with let- ters of recommendation from the Charity society of London. At first it was rumored that the congregation had called him, but it was afterwards denied. He stayed with them for about six weeks, and then left, taking the congregation at Amwell, N. J. Many in the congregation were opposed to him because he had no recommendations from the deputies. The congregation then began making overtures to Steiner again. There had all along been a strong party in the congregation who were friendly to him. He had left Germantown in 1756 and had gone to Frederick. But this charge was on the frontier, and besides was of very large extent. It covered with all its preaching points a territory, it is said, 160 miles long by 60 miles wide. THE PHILADELPHIA CONGREGATION. 533 Steluer claimed that iu order to go around it he had to travel 300 miles, and that during his pastorate he had traveled 5000 miles. He desired to get away, as he was in middle life, and the work was too hard for him. He arranged with the elders of the Philadelphia congregation that when he came to Philadelphia to release his son from military service .in the winter of February, 1759, he should preach for them two Sundays. They elected him as pastor. May 1, 1759, oifering him $96 a year. He began his pastorate. May 20, 1759. But for this act he was severely criticised by the members of the coetus. Otterbein wrote him on August 18, 1759, a very severe letter, stating that he did not think providence had called him to Philadelphia, and moreover he should have waited to get permission from coetus. Steiuer replied that he had done just what others had done before — accepted a charge without waiting for coetus to decide on it. Steiner went to the coetus of 1759 at Goshenhoppen, but was so severely attacked there by Stoy that he left. Indeed, Stoy's report of that coetus to the Holland deputies is little more than a philippic against Steiner for going to Philadelphia and the deputies wrote back that he was too severe. Steiuer and his congregation therefore withdrew from the coetus, although he appealed to Holland, September 28, 1759, to confirm the call, as the congregation did not desire to leave the Holland fathers. They decided against him, that as he had withdrawn from the coetus, he must lose his share 534 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. iu the Holland donations, but required him to be paid out of them up to the date of his departure from Frederick. His ministry at Philadelphia seems to have been quite successful, for he claimed that his audiences had increased so much that a hundred more seats had to be placed in the church, and the congregation had paid off $750 of its debt. Soon after his arrival he published a sermon on the death of King George II. of England, which he preached, Octo- ber 25, 1760, on Deuteronomy 34 : 5, 7-8, and published, February 1, 1761, entitled "A proper Monument of Love and Honor to the all-gracious King worthy of Glory." It is an elaborate eulogy, comparing the king to Moses, and reveals Steiner as a very careful thinker and fine preacher. During his pastorate he drew up a set of resolutions for the parochial school at Philadelphia.* But although his ministry was successful, yet he complains of little fruit, for there seems to have been a minority iu the congregation against him composed of Stoy's friends. He seems to have overworked himself, preaching generally three times a Sunday. He suddenly died on Tuesday, July 6, 1 762. On the Sunday before his death he had preached on the text, " O God, thou art my God, early will I seek thee, my soul thirsteth for thee, my flesh longeth for thee in a dry and thirsty land where no water is." Psalm 63: 1. Muhlenberg preached his funeral sermon on Acts 20 : 25 * See " History of the First Reformed Church of Philadelphia" by Rev. D. Van Ilorne, D, D., page 32. THE PHILADELPHIA CONGREGATION. 535 -38. The day of the funeral was insufferably hot, and a thunder storm came up as they were proceeding to the grave. He was buried in the Reformed graveyard at Franklin Square. At the time of his death he was busy at the publication of a series of sermons. He intended to publish four vol- umes of them for circulation among the Germans, only one of which appeared after his death, entitled " The Glorious Appearing of the Lord to the General Judgment of the World." It contained eighteen sermons, followed by Muhlenberg's funeral sermon, and closing with a brief sketch of his life. His sermons reveal him a careful writer and an earnest preacher. Doubtless he was a fine pulpit orator. Unfortunately his tendencies to independency and polemics, and liis lack of executive ability in the manage- ment of his finances interfered with his usefulness. The congregation being independent of the coetus, fell into the hands of an independent minister. Rev. Frederick Rotheubuhler. He had been born and educated at Berne, where he had been ordained, February 28, 1752. He seems to have left Berne with a letter dated December 16, 1759, recommending him to the Holland Church. In 1761 he was in London, which he left after September 16, 1761. He had been preaching to a Reformed congregation in New York when the Philadelphia congregation called him, July 30, 1762. But by the time the coetus of 1763 met on May 5, a large part of his congregation had already 536 THE GEEMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. learned his unworthy character. They had before this wanted to be rid of the coetus, but now they were glad to invoke its authority to enable them to get rid of Rothen- buhler. Two elders of the congregation appeared before the coetus, asking that the congregation be taken back under its care, so that it might decide for the consistory against Rothenbuhler. Rothenbuhler also appeared and asked to be received into the coetus. The coetus decided that although the congregation did not belong to it, yet as it appealed to it, it would give a decision. The congrega- tion appealed to coetus to decide for them on a constitu- tional point, namely, whether according to their call their congregation had a right to dismiss him when they wanted. This he denied. It was the very point Schlatter and the coetus denied years before, and the consistory stood against him. Coetus, however, now declared against their former position, and decided from the wording of the call to him that the congregation had the right to dismiss him at will. Indeed to this he had agreed when he accepted by signing his name to the call. The coetus refused to accept him as a member, as they had been warned against him by the Holland fathers. As they published their action, Rothen- buhler on June 30, 1763, published in the Pennsylvania Gazette a protest against it, asking all readers to suspend judgment till he could reply. As they declare that tliey had refused him because of rumors against him abroad, he on August 4 published his testimonials which he had re- THE PHILADELPHIA CONGREGATION. 537 ceived from the miuisters of Berue, his birthplace, and also the testimonials from the Reformed ministers of London, among them Planta. The coetus replied to him in the same paper, Augnst 18, defending them by his conduct abroad and also his conduct in Philadelphia. Rothenbuh- ler, therefore, separated from the Philadelphia congrega- tion, taking with him his adherents. They organized an independent Reformed congregation, calling it St. George's, and took a lot on Fourth street near New. There they began building a costly new church, far beyond their means. As some of the members were personally respon- sible for it, they were thrown in prison for del>t. When their acquaintances, as they looked in on them, asked of them why they were there, they replied that they had been put in jail for building a church. Rothenbuhler tried to raise some money for the building, and went to Boston for that purpose, having a letter of introduction from Frank- lin, May 24, 1764. The congregation then appealed to the Episcopal Church to save them. A petition was sent to the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Archbishop of York and the Bishop of London, dated October 21, 1764. In it they agreed that after Easter, 1766, none but Episcopal miuisters should officiate in their church, and nothing be used but the Episcopal prayer book, and they reconmiend Rothenbuhler to be their pastor after he had been ordained by the bishop. They state that their debt is over $5000, for which the houses of many of the petitioners were heavily 538 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. mortgaged. This petition was signed by twenty of the mem- bers. Nothing seems to have come out of this petition, and the building was sold, June 12, 1770, to a Mr. Hockley for $3500, and by him sold to the Methodists for $2500. It is now the oldest Methodist church building in America. Roth- enbuhler meanwhile died of the fever and was buried in the Reformed cemetery in Franklin Square, August 9, 1766. While these events were taking place, the old congre- gation began looking around for a pastor. Otterbein soon came into their mind. They began corresponding with him as soon as coetus decided against Rothenbuhler, and wrote to him, May 24. He replied that he would preach for them, June 26. But although located in a weak charge at Frederick on the frontier, he was unwilling to leave, especially as he was about building a church. He hoped Leydich might be gotten to Frederick ; if not, he would ask them to wait until the next year (1764). Meanwhile, the members felt they were losing ground by being with- out a pastor, especially as Rothenbuhler had built a fine new church and drew away adherents of the old church. So they said they could not wait for him. A committee of coetus, consisting of Stapel, Alsentz and DuBois, met at Philadelphia, October 24, 1763, and considered the matter. They proposed three alternatives to the congregation. They could either wait for Otterbein or extend a call to a Swiss ]mHtor at Arnheim, Holland, named Anosi (of whom the deputies had spoken as being THE PHILADELPHIA CONGREGATION. 539 willing to come to America), or they could choose a minis- ter from among those in the coetus, and recommended them to choose between Leydich, Waldschmidt and Weyberg, the latter having just arrived the previous year. The congregation decided on the latter method. So a meeting of the congregation was held on October 25, at which Weyberg was elected. He entered on his duties, Novem- ber 13, 1763. It was a wise choice. He proved to be the man to bring this sorely afflicted congregation, divided for so many years, out of their troubles, and make them one of the strongest congregations in Philadelphia, as well as the most influential in the coetus. After their quarrels of fourteen years, the congregation entered on an era of peace and prosperity that lasted for about a half a century. Under his pastorate they built a new church building. The corner-stone was laid, April 10, 1772, and it was dedicated. May 1, 1774, in the presence of the governor and the coetus. It was fortunate for the congregation that they built this building when they did. For had- they waited a year later, the Revolutionary troubles would have prevented its being built. But by building what was per- haps the largest church building in Philadelphia (for Wey- berg reports 2000 seats in it), its size gave the Reformed a prominence in Philadelphia during the Revolution second to no other denomination. The troubles and struggles of this congregation in the first half century of its existence were forgotten in the prosperity and prominence of its second half century. CHAPTER v.— SECTION III. THE MEMBERS OF THE COETUS. The additions to the ministry of the coetus came from two sources : 1. The ministers sent from Holland by the deputies. 2. The ministers raised up by the coetus from its own congregations in America. A.— The Ministers Sent From Holland. The deputies and also the classis of Amsterdam earn- estly sought, as their funds allowed, for ministers to go to Pennsylvania. They repeatedly wrote to the universities of Heidelberg and Herborn and elsewhere for candidates. The ministers they sent over were as follows : 1755. Christopher Muntz.* 1757. John George Alsentz. He was licensed at Heidelberg by the Reformed con- sistory. May 10, 1756, and ordained, June 1, 1756. He was in Amsterdam in the early part of 1757 for quite a time, for by his many excellent sermons and fine social * See the previous section, pnge 5H1. ■ THE MEMBERS OF THE COETUS. 541 qualities he endeared himself to quite a number of the ministers there, and preached very acceptably for Rev. Mr. Kessler. They, therefore, urged him to go to Penn- sylvania. He appeared before the classis, April 21, 1757. They sent him to the deputies with a recommendation from Rev. Mr. Kulenkamp. He appeared before the deputies for examination. May 24, 1757. There seems to have been some friction between the classis and deputies as to the right of examination and ordination, but the classis gave way to the deputies, who ever after attended to the appointment of ministers to Pennsylvania. He was then sent by the deputies, leaving after June 17. He was in London, August 13, where he was very kindly received by the Charity society and Rev. Dr. Chandler, who paid his passage to America. After he started from England, his vessel was compelled to put back because of a storm. He arrived at Philadelphia, December 3, 1757. A short time after his arrival he was placed in charge of the con- gregation at Germautown. He might have had the Phila- delphia congregation, but he was afraid of its divisions. He soon rose to prominence in the coetus. He was appointed its clerk in 1759, 1760, 1763 and 1765, and was its president in 1761 and 1764. In 1761 he went back to Europe on account of family affairs. He appeared before the classis at Amsterdam, February 4, 1762, on his way to his native Palatinate, and promised them to look up young ministers to go to Pennsylvania. He recom^ 542 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. mended to them three young men, who, however, did not come. He found when he arrived at his former home that his father had died, and he was detained in order to settle up the estate. He returned to Pennsylvania in 1 762, arriving at Germantown, September 27. In that year the German town congregation spent $1200 in rebuilding its church. In his report to the Holland deputies he com- plained about the lowncss of his salary, but said he pre- ferred suffering to complaining. He was a very active man. Together with Leydich he revived the Skippack congregation, and dedicated their church, November 13, 1763. He supplied Amwell in 1760. He dedicated the Tohickon church. May 8, 1766. In September, 1763, he made a trip to Virginia to preach for the pastorless Re- formed there, which took three weeks, and in which he covered 200 miles. He returned just in time for the coetus of that year. In 1767 he is reported to the coetus as sick. He died, October 28, 1767. He was a man of fine ability and earnest consecration. He published a small book entitled, " Why am I Reformed." His son was after his death sent by the Charity society to the Academy, now the University of Pennsylvania. 1761. Casper Michael Stapel. He had been a Lutheran minister in the county of Mecklenberg, Germany. He left the Ijutheran ministry jind studied at Herborn University, from which he appeals THE MEMBEIiS OF THE COETUS. 543 to the Holland deputies for aid, June 21, 1758. He was recommended to them by Rev. Mr. Engels, of the Hague. The classis of Amsterdam asked for delay in his appoint- ment, because of some fears lest the fact that his wife was a Lutheran and he had been a Lutheran would militate against his success among the Reformed. His wife abso- lutely refused to become Reformed or to go with him to America. He was examined by the deputies, July 10, 1761, especially on the doctrinal differences between the Lutherans and the Reformed, and was appointed to Pennsylvania. He went by way of London. There he demanded money of Chandler, as he said he had lost his baggage on ship. Chandler was offended at his demand, and refused. Stapel wrote back to the classis of Amster- dam about the unkind treatment by the Charity society. Chandler also wrote, explaining the matter. And classis replied that they had not given Stapel any authority to demand money of the Charity society. He came to America by way of Maryland. When he arrived he went at once to the congregation at Amwell, N. J., which had called him when in Europe. He at once took an active part in the coetus, and was its clerk (1762). Indeed, he took almost too active a part for -so new a man, for he managed the case against Rieger at the next coetus of 1762. He was made president, 1763. His ministry at first was quite successful. He had large ingatherings. In 1762 he received eighty-four into the clun-ch, and baptized 544 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. sixty-four children. But there is a tone of boastfulness in his letters hardly borne out by the facts. Thus he wrote to the deputies that he hoped to make New Jersey Ger- man Reformed, although there was at that time only one charge in it. But the most of his correspondence with Holland was about his wife, who refused to come to Pennsylvania. He wrote to them to compel her to come. They wrote to her, and he sends a power of attorney to compel her to come. But still she refused. He wanted to know whether as she had been separated so long he could not marry again. The classis replied (1764), not until he had been legally divorced. Meanwhile com- plaints began to come in against him in his congregation. The coetus of 1765 says he had withdrawn from its mem- bership and begun the practice of medicine, for he was, it is said, a fine chemist. But he did not live long. He died, March, 1766, of consumption. While at Amwell, he published Lampe's catechism, " The Milk of Truth," with the approval of the coetus. As a student of Her- born, he was naturally friendly to Lampe's federal Cal- vinistic predestinarianism. Pie had the degree of doctor of philosophy. 1762. Casper Diedkicii Weyberg. Casper Diedrich Weyberg was not from Switzerland, as Ilarbaugh says. He was born at A\ estofen, in the county of Mark, in Westphalia, Germany. He matricu- THE MEMBERS OF THE COETUS. 545 lated at the Reformed UDiversity at Duisburg, October 15, 1756. lu 1761 he made application to the deputies to be sent to America, as he wanted to leave his congregation on account of lack of financial support. On July 20 Deputy De Rhoer stated that Weyberg had called on him at Am- sterdam. He was appointed by the deputies, September 8, 1761, but he delayed his going. It seems he returned to his native country, and his wife refused to go with him. He also seems to have had financial difficulties. But on April 1, 1762, the deputies get out of patience and require him to be in Holland within six weeks. He started out with his wife and child and went as far as London, ^vhen his wife turned back. He, however, went on and arrived at Philadelphia either the latter part of 1762 or early in 1763. He began his ministry at Easton, March 7, 1763, wnere he preached with great acceptance, so that the neighboring Lehigh charge wanted him to supply them also. The Easton charge was greatly disappointed that he resigned, October 8, 1763, to accept the call to Philadel- phia, and protested against it. They claimed that they had paid toward his traveling expenses forty-one pounds, had bought a parsonage, and had raised his salary from fifty to seventy-five pounds, and now he was torn away from them by the coetus for Philadelphia. His wife did not come to Pennsylvania till somewhere in 1764, after he had become pastor in Philadelphia. His pastorate there was very successfid. He brought the congregation to a 35 546 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IX U. S. prosperity never known there before. The college ot New Jersey gave him the title of Doctor of Divinity. He died, August 21, 1790, and was buried iu the Reformed cemetery in Franklin Square. The funeral sermon was preached by his friend. Rev. Dr. Helmuth, of the Luth- eran Church, who also composed a hymn sung at a ser- vice, September 26, 1790. Dr. Van Home says he was a tall, slim man with a powerful voice, always carrying his Bible under his arm when going to church. He also educated a number of young men for the ministry. He became one of the leaders of the coetus, was its clerk in 1764 and 1781, and its president in 1765 and 1782. 1764. John William Hendel. We come now to the most beautiful spiritual character in the early Church, John William Hendel. He has been called the John of the early Church. He was born at Durckheim, in the Palatinate, and matriculated at Heid- elberg university. May 10, 1759. He was recommended to the deputies by Kalbfus, the pastor at Durckheim. He passed an excellent examination before the deputies at the Hague, June 27, 1764, and was to sail August 14, 1764. On his arrival the coetus recommended him to Lancaster. He entered on his duties there in January, 1765, and re- mained pastor there till 1769. In 1768 some of the mem- bers brought charges against him to the coetus that he did THE MEMBERS OF THE COETUS. 547 not care sufficiently for the parochial school or catechize every Sunday. He replied that his appointment to preach at Piquae every fourth Sunday prevented catechization every Sunday, They complained that he kept many chil- dren from joining the church. He replied it was done only for the weightiest reasons. He evidently insisted on good church discipline. The coetus sustained him against his opponents. But as the opposition in the congregation continued, it recommended him the next year to leave Lancaster and go to Tulpehocken. In 1771 he began the instruction of students for the ministry. In 1773 the coetus urged him to go to Baltimore so as to unite the rival congregations, but he declined. In 1782 he returned to Lancaster as pastor, remaining until 1794, when he ac- cepted Philadelphia. He died there of yellow fever, Sep- tember 29, 1798. His intimate friend, Rev. Dr. Helmuth, of the Lutheran Church, preached the funeral sermon on 2 Samuel 1 : 26, " I am distressed for thee, my brother Jonathan." The degree of Doctor of Divinity was given him by Princeton in the fall of 1787. He was a remark- ably well rounded out character, scholarly, yet practical, and above all spiritual. He was a tower of strength for the Reformed. Stahlschmidt says of him that he was one of the best preachers he had heard in America ; that he possessed much science and knowledge, and in heart was consecrated to true godliness. At Lancaster he held a prayer meeting every Thursday evening from 1 782 to 1794. 548 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. 1765. In this year the Holland deputies, after writing in various directions for ministers for Pennsylvania, were able to send four, Nicolas Pomp, Frederick Lewis Henop, John Jacob Zufall and Frederick Julius Berger. These ^Yere recommended by Prof. Wundt, of Heidelberg, who presented their request for ministers to Pennsylvania to the Palatinate consistory. It directed all inspectors of the Church to let Holland know if they knew of any candi- dates. The last two will be described in the next section. Nicolas Pomp. Nicolas Pomp was born January 20, 1774. He was from Maubuechel, near Kusel, in the province of Zwei- brucken. Wundt says that both Pomp and Berger had to suffer considerable persecution because they determined to go to America. They had to give up one-tenth of their pos- sessions to the county and all chance of getting a pastorate if they ever came back. He appeared before the classical commissioners at Amsterdam, March 14, 1765, and before the deputies at the Hague. He was examined, March 27, 1765, together with the other three candidates sent that year. On his arrival in Pennsylvania he accepted part of Ley- dich's charge, which had become too large for the latter, and took the Falkner Swamp congregation. In November 17, 1771, he asked the Holland fathers to send fifty or sixty gulden to his father in Germany, as he was poor. In 1774 he published a book against the Univer- THE MEMBERS OP THE COETUS. 549 salists in answer to a German work by Siegvolck, entitled " The Eternal Gospel," two editions of which had been published in Pennsylvariia. Pomp answered this in a book entitled " Brief Proofs of the Doctrine of the Eternal Gospel, by which it is clearly shown that the Restoration of all things is vainly sought in Holy Scripture. At the request of many friends published by N. Pomp, V. D. M., Philadelphia, printed by Henry Miller, 1774." The Uni- versalists had started in Oley, Berks county, and this was an answer to them. He says he published it after it had lain for four years in his study. It consisted of two parts. 1. Of God's Love. 2. Of God's Righteous Punishments. In September, 1783, he began the pastorate of the old Reformed congregation at Baltimore. Here he came into conflict with the new congregation under Otterbein. He found it a difficult field and preached his farewell sermon, November 15, 1789, because of opposition caused mainly by two members about the new church building. He sup- plied Goshenhoppen from 1789 to 1791, until J. Theo- bald Faber, Jr., was ready to take the pastorate. Pomp then went to Indian Field. He was at Witpen from 1794 to 1797. He died at Easton, September 1, 1819. He was clerk of coetus, 1769, 1782, 1790, and president, 1770 and 1783. Frederick Lewis Henop. Frederick Lewis Henop was born at Kaiserslautern in the Palatinate, the son of the rector there. He matricu- 550 THE GERMAX REFORMED CHURCH IX U. S. latod at Heidelberg university, Xovember 29, 1758. He appeared before the deputies, March 27, 1 765, and came with Pomp and the others to America. He was at once assigned to Easton, which had so complained about Wey- berg's departure. He remained there till 1770, when he removed to Frederick, Maryland. His field was quite large, as it is said he also preached at Lovcttsville, Va. On May, 1784, he was called to Reading and accepted the call. He was about removing: to Readino^ when he sud- denly died. He was clerk of coetus in 1770 and presi- dent in 1771. 1767. In this year three ministers sent by the deputies, Charles Lange, John George Witner and John Theobald Faber, joined the coetus. Charles Lange will be considered in the next section. John George Witner. John George Witner was born at Bellheim in the Palatinate, August 13, 1735. His father was pastor there and afterward became a member of the consistory at Heid- elberg. . He matriculated at Heidelberg university, De- cember 12, 1755. He was examined by the deputies in Holland, May 27, 176G, and a|)peared before the classical commissioners at Amsterdam, June 5. He sailed on the ship Catharine for New York. After his arrival in Amer- ica he was placed over the Muddy Creek charge, consisting of the Muddy Creek, Zeltenreich, Cocalico and Reyer's THE MEMBERS OF THE COETUS. 551 churches. Id 1768 his cliarge brought complaints against him, but he replied that two of them had not paid his sal- ary. Insufficiency of salary reduced him to poverty, which produced great gloominess of disposition. He left there and was without a charge for a time, but became pastor, 1772, at Milford, Kestenberg and Saltzburg, where he w^as successful and prosperous. He was clerk of coetus in 1777, and had there been a meeting the next year he would (according to the usual custom which advanced the clerk to be president) have been president, but his absence prevented. He died in his charge, December 25, 1779. John Theobald Fabek. He was born at Zozenheim, (or Hohenheim) in the Palatinate south of Bingen (and not near Zurich, as Weiser had said), February 13, 1739. He matriculated at Heidelberg university, February 5, 1760. He was ex- amined and ordained at Heidelberg, April 20, 1763. His credentials to Holland were dated April 28, 1766, so that he must have left the Palatinate about that time. He was examined ]>y the deputies. May 27, 1766, and was with the classical commissioners in Amsterdam, June 5. He arrived at Philadelphia, October 24, 1766, and began his pastorate at Old and New Goshenhoppen and Great Swamp. He married Barbara Rose, with whose father he stayed at Reading during one of the meetings of the coetus. He proved a worthy successor of Weiss in the 552 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. Goshenhoppen charge. lu 1769 Lancaster called him, but after considering it for four weeks he declined. In 1775 Lancaster again called him, and two elders appeared at the coetus to press the call, but still he did not accept. In 1779 the congregation called him a third time. He accepted and went to Lancaster in October, 1779, But he did not long remain satisfied there. He longed to get back to his old charge. A fter three years he ac- cepted a call to the Indian Field charge, and in 1786 he returned as pastor of the Goshenhoppen charge. His former parishioners gathered in a large crowd at the church to welcome him. As he approached the church he said, " You people of Goshenhoppen, I will never leave you. Here will I live and here will I die." On Novem- ber 2, 1788, he attended a funeral service at the New Goshenhoppen church. He urged his wife to go with him. Strange to say, that morning he had his wife conduct family prayers. He was accustomed to wear a white cap of silk on account of baldness. Without removing it he ascended the pulpit to the amazement of the congregation. He began preaching on Matthew 9: 18-26. When he had closed the sermon with an amen he suddenly laid the palm of his right hand to his head and slowly sinking to the floor uttered the words, "Come and help me." He was carried to the schoolhouse. His wife approached him to whom he simply said, " My head." In a few mo- ments he breathed his last. Rev. Mr. Blumer preached THE MEMBERS OF THE COETUS. 553 his funeral sermon on Hebrews 13 : 17. He was buried in the New Goshenhoppen church. Out of respect to him, his wife was permitted to live in the parsonage for sev- eral years, and his oldest son was educated by the congre- gation for the ministry, and afterwards became his succes- sor. He was clerk of the coetus, 1771, and president the next year. 1768. Frederick Dallicker. Frederick Dallicker came from an old Zurich family. His father was a prominent painter there. He was born February 2, 1738. In 1757 he was ordained to the min- istry. The next year he became the assistant to the Ger- man minister at Geneva, In 1760 he became chaplain in the French service. It seems that he had became involved in debt by going security for some one, although his father paid the debt before he went to Pennsylvania. He ar- rived at Amsterdam, December, 1766, appeared before the classical commissioners, April 17, 1767. He appeared be- fore the deputies at the Hague, June 25, for examination. On his arrival in America he became pastor of the charge at Amwell, N. J. Germantown called him in 1768, but he declined. In 1769 charges were brought against him at Amwell, and a committee sent to investigate them. As a result he left Amwell, but retained the rest of the charge, preaching at Rockaway, Fox Hill and Alexandria. After Pomp left Falkner Swamp, he went there, 1782. He sup- 554 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IX U. S. plied the Goshenhoppen charge, 1781-1784. On October 10, 1787, he was present with Schlatter at the funeral of Muhlenberg. He died at Falkuer Swamp, January 15, 1799, and his funeral sermon was preached by J. Theo- bald Faber, Jr. He was a prominent member of the coe- tus, being its clerk 1774, 1783, 1786, 1788, 1789, and president of it, 1775, 1787 and 1790. 1771. In this year two excellent vouug; men, Charles Lewis Boehme and Abraham Blumer, joined the coetus. Charles Lewis Bcehme. Charles Lewis Boehme was born at Muhlbach, in the Palatinate south of Eppingen, and matriculated at Heidel- berg university, November 22, 1755. He had been a vicar to a congregation and officiated at Bacharach, on the Rhine, and Hedesheim, near Creutznach. He was at Amsterdam, August 2, and preached in Rev. Mr. Kess- ler's church with credit. He appeared before the deputies at the Hague, August 22, 1770, and before the classical commissioners, August 27. After his arrival in Pennsyl- vania he was sent to Lancaster, where if no complaint <3ame in against him, he would be permitted to preach. At the next coetus no reports against him having come in, he was permitted to become their minister, remaining there till July, 1775. He was then called to McCallis- ter's (Hanover) where he remained till 1779. Then he THE MEMBERS OF THE COETUS. 555 accepted a call to the old congregation at Baltimore, where his first marriage is recorded, July 28, 1779. But he soon sickened of gout and epilepsy, and was compelled to resign. In his sickness he became very poor. The Bal- timore congregation, at the suggestion of the coetus, sup- ported him for a year. The coetus appealed to Holland for aid, which was granted. In 1783 the deputies gave him .^40, as the Baltimore congregation was not able to support him because of the calamities of the war. Boehme seems to have been an excellent, talented man. The coetus of 1785 speaks of him as just having died. He was clerk of coetus in 1772, and president the next year. Abeaham Blumer. Abraham Blumer was born December 14, 1736, O. S., at Graps, formerly in the canton of Glarus, Switzerland. His father, John Jacob Blumer, died when he was only ten years old. He matriculated at Basle, August 1, 1754. He was ordained, June 8, 1756. He became chaplain of a Swiss regiment in the Sardinian service, July 11, 1757, remaining in it up to 1766, when he left it to enter the teaching profession in his canton. He became vicar to a sickly minister, and also private tutor. Rev. Mr. Planta, the pastor of the German Reformed church at London, wrote a letter, June 26, 1770, to the deputies strongly urg- ing his appointment. He appeared before the deputies, Aujjust 22, together with Boehrao, and also before the pressions of the British and preached an eloquent sermon before the Provincial Congress, at Savannah, on July 4, 1775, on Isaiah, II : 13. " Ephraim shall not envy Judah and Judah shall not vex Ephraim." He was selected, July 10, 1775, by the colony of Georgia, as one of its representatives to the Continental Congress, and his congregation gave their consent for him to go to Phil- adelphia to it. He made the opening prayer at the Con- gress. But Zubli began to show a middle course. Although he opposed the oppressions of the British he did not think the colonies were ready for independence and became a * See chapter 3, section 15, page 256. THE COETUS AND CIVIL AFFAIRS. 607 peace man. Early in 1776 lie was accused by Samuel S. Chase, of Maryland, of treasonable correspondence with Sir James Wright, colonial governor of Georgia. We do not know how this was, but he soon after left the Congress because he was no longer in sympathy with its tendencies toward independence. In doing so he missed immortal fame. Had he remained a few months longer he would have become one of the signers of the declaration of inde- pendence. He went back to Savannah to prevent that colony from separating from England. But he soon found his ipfluence gone. He was banished from Savannah in 1777, having half of his estate confiscated. When the British gained control of Savannah, 1779, he returned, remaining there till he died, July 23, 1781. After his death the citizens seem to become more appreciative of him and named two streets after him, Joachim and Zubly. One of the suburbs of the city was named after his birth- place, St. Gall. The other minister who sympathized with the royalists was John Michael Kern, pastor of the German Reformed church in New York. He did not believe the colonies were ripe for self-goverment. He was compelled to leave, and went to Halifax, and returned after the Revolution. Rubel too was deposed from the ministry for his immor- ality and toryism. Still this was long after he had left the coetus. As these men were exceptions to the rule, and as they did not belong to the coetus, they are unim- 608 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. portaot to us. The great bodyof the Reformed clergy stood for liberty. Some very interesting illustrations are told of some of them. One of the first congregations to take its stand for lib- erty was the Philadelphia. Together with the Lutheran congregation and the German society of Philadelphia, they issued a virtual declaration of independence a year before the Declaration of Independence. These three organiza- tions published in August, 1775, a circular appealing for liberty against the unjust exactions of Britain. It seems that when the Continental Congress had appealed to the British Parliament for relief, instead of being answered with kindness, they were answered by .severity. And to reduce the most refractory of the colonies, namely, New England, Pennsylvania and Virginia, they forbade them the Newfoundland fisheries, which were the support of New England especially. And parliament granted the right of these fisheries only to New York and North Car- olina, so as to win them from the patriots. The Reformed and Lutheran congregations of Philadelphia, together with the German society, therefore appealed to their German brethren in New York and North Carolina not to be drawn away by the temptations of the British, and urged them to support Congress and liberty. They represented that the Germans of Pennsylvania were doing everything to support Congress in organizing militia companies ready to inarch when ordered. This appeal had its effect. For THE COETUS AND CIVIL AFFAIRS. 609 the British found later that the Germans of New York under General Herkimer,* the hero of Oriskany, defeated them and prepared the way for Burgoyne's defeat, while in the south the Germans greatly aided the patriots under Generals Marion and Greene. This appeal of the Re- formed of Philadelphia is worthy to be placed alongside of the Mecklenburg Declaration of the Presbyterians in 1775. This early appeal of the Reformed congregation at Philadelphia made it prominent for liberty. As it was one of the largest church buildings in that city, it was used for large gatherings for liberty. Thus when the memorial service of General Montgomery, who had been killed at Quebec, was held, February 19, 1776, it was held in that church. When the British army entered Philadelphia, Weyberg's son stood at the door of his father's house and shouted : " Hurrah for General Wash- ington I" The Britisli soldiers replied: "You rebel." During the British occupation the Hessians came to hear Weyberg preach. He so boldly asserted the justice of the cause of the patriots that the British became alarmed at the daily desertions of the Hessians, and to stop him threatened his life and threw him into prison. The text of the first sermon that Weyberg preached after being liberated from prison was Psalm 79 : 1, " O God, the heathen are come into thine inheritance, thy holy temple * See Reformed Historical Magazine, Vol. III., page 309. 39 610 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. have they defiled." Rev. Dr. Berg says that he had it on the authority of aged members, that it was confidcutly asserted that if Weyberg had not been silenced, the Hes- sians would have left the British service to a man. The British took possession of the Reformed church there, September 26, 1777, using it as a hospital, while the con- gregation v/orshiped in the school-house. The cost of repairing the church after the British left was $15,200. The first soldiers to arrive in New England were two comp£tnies of Pennsylvania Germans from Frederick. They marched 550 miles in twenty-two days. A com- pany of soldiers from Reading, under Captain Nagle, arrived at Boston a month before its evacuation l)y the British. The German soldiers, when marching into bat- tle, would sing, " England's Georgelet (little George), emperor, king, For God and us is too small a thing." Very interesting are the relations of the Reformed to the awful winter at Valley F'orge. We will elsewhere give illustrations of Runkel's preaching at Valley Forge.* The Reformed churches at Trapi)e, East Vin- cent, Skippack and Falkner Swamp were used as hos- pitals. Rev. J. L. Fluck says: "The Vincent church was used as a hospital, Avhicli Washington frequently vis- ited. Twenty-two of the Revolutionary soldiers were buried in the cemetery of that church, in memory of whom * See page 620. THE COETUS AND CIVIL AFFAIRS. 611 a monument was erected in 1731, one of whose inscrip- tions ran thus : " 'Their names, though lost in earth beh)\v, And hence are not recorded here, Are known where everlasting pleasures flow, Beyond the reach of death and fear.' " Leydich, as pastor of that district, we doubt not, often visited the soldiers and cheered them with religious con- solations," Gobre(.'ht, pastor at Tohickon and Hanover, often addressed the soldiers on their way to join the army, encouraging them with patriotic appeals and urging them to religious lives. HelflFenstein, at Ijaucaster, preached to the Hessians in captivity there on Isaiah 52 : 2 : " For thus saith the Lord, Ye have sold yourselves for naught and shall be redeemed without money." This plainness of speech offended many of the Hessians. On another occasion, after he had preached a patriotic sermon on the text, " If the Son make you free, ye shall be free indeed," the excitement was so great that he was sent home under guard. He once preached to the soldiers on the text, " If God be for us, who can be against us ?" Hendel too was known for his patriotism. When he went to the congregations in Lykens, Armstrong and Mahantango valleys, beyond the Blue Mountains, where the Indians still lingered, his life was endangered. So these congregations would send a guard, who would meet 612 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. him in the entrance to these valleys, escort him to the church, stand guard outside while he preached, and guard him back to a place of safety again. So great was Nev- elling's patriotism that he loaned all of his money, about $12,000, to the American government, and, it is said, joined the army as chaplain. The British government offered a large reward for his capture, and Washington so highly esteemed him that on one occasion he ordered out a troop of horse to protect him. Nevelling lost the cer- tificate of his loan to the government, and so lost all his money, which he afterwards greatly needed. The south- ern Reformed, although not in the coetus, also showed their patriotism. Suther and his adherents seceded from the union church in Guilford, because of their patriotism. He was driven from his home by the British, who devas- tated his farm, drove off his cattle and destroyed his prop- erty, as also of his parishioners, because the men of their families were in the American army. But the membership of the Reformed were as active for the cause of liberty as the ministers. The number of the prominent Reformed soldiers in that war is worthy of note. Of the generals, Philip Schuyler was a member of the Dutch Reformed Church of New York,* and General Nicolas Herkimer, who lost his life at Oriskany, was a German Reformed of New York. Of the officers of lower rank quite a number were Reformed. The leading • See Reformed Church Historical Magazine, November, 1893. THE COETUS AND CIVIL AFFAIRS. 613 elder of the Easton congregation, Colonel Peter Kichlein, led bis regiment at the battle of Long Island, and the bravery of his men prevented the rapid advance of the British on New York City. He was taken prisoner, and when released, returned home sick.* The Hiester family was also prominent, its ancestor, Daniel Hiester, having been one of the most prominent elders of the Reformed and a member of the first coetus. Of that family four sons were officers, Daniel, the elder, being captain ; two brothers, majors, and another, captain. A cousin, Joseph, became colonel and later major general of the militia, as did also two of the others later. The Spyker family had also been prominent for its warriors, Henry Spyker being a colonel in the Revolution. As paymaster he expended over $600,000, and accurately accounted for every penny. The Reading congregation furnished two colonels, Peter Nagle and Nicolas Lutz. Berks county also gave Lieu- tenant Colonel Valentine Eckert ; Lebanon county fur- nished John Gloninger, afterward colonel, who fought in the battle of Staten Island and Trenton ; Montgomery county furnished Colonel Frederick Antes, of Pottstown, who, although the king's justice of the peace, joined the patriots, and was especially sought by the British, who almost caught him in his house at Pottstown on one occa- sion ; Philadelphia furnished Colonel Faremer, later com- * See his life in the pamphlet, " Battle of Long Island," by Rev. George C. Heckman, D. D., one of his descendants. 614 THE GERMAN REEORMED CHURCH IN U. S. missary general. Rev. Jacob Michael, the independent Reformed minister, was appointed chaplain on May 17, 1777, of the first battalion of the Berks county militia. But the greatest Reformed soldier of the war was unquestionably Baron Steuben. He was born in 1730 at Magdeburg, Germany, and at an early age entered the Prussian army of Frederick the Great, under whom he learned the art of war. In the Seven Years' AYar he rose to the rank of adjutant general. He afterward came into contact with Franklin at Paris in 1777, and was induced to come to America. He left France on September 26, 1777, and landed at Portsmouth, N. H., after a very dangerous voyage of two months. He did not feel at home in America until he came to Pennsylvania, where, he heard his native German spoken and was enthusiasti- cally received by the Pennsylvania Germans, who idol- ized a general who fought under Frederick the Great. Steuben met the congress at York, and was sent by them to Valley Forge to drill the soldiers. He soon tauglit them the military tactics that made Frederick the Great the master of Europe, and by April 29, 177.S, the American army was able to execute the manceuvrcs of a regular army. On May 5, 1778, he was made inspector general of the army with the rank of a major general. By his military discipline he saved the American army. Thus before he came it is said that the Americans, having been accustomed to a sort of guerilla warfare, did not THE COETUS AND CIVIL AFFAIRS. 615 know the use of a bayonet, except to roast beef over a camp-fire, Steuben taught them its use, so that in four months some of the soldiers made a bayonet charge, cap- turing Stony Point and gaining the admiration of the world. In 1779 he published a book, entitled, "The Blue Book, or Steuben's Regulations," which was long the standard of army tactics. Steuben was then sent to the South, to do with that army what he had done in the North. He brought them under discipline, so that when Arnold invaded Virginia, the Americans checked him, until finally the British were shut up in Yorktown. He was the only officer at that siege who had before been engaged in a siege and knew how to act. Strange to say, when the British surrendered, he was the officer in command. His military tactics thus saved our country. After he had drilled our soldiers, it is said the Americans never lost a battle. Washington was the commander and Steuben the drill-master of the Revolution. After the war he lived in New York, where he became an elder in the German Reformed church. He first suggested the organization of the society of the Cin- cinnati. He also formed the plans of a military academy, which was afterwards located at West Point. The war left him poor, but after eight years he received an annuity of $2500 and 1 1 ,000 acres, north of Utiea, New York, where a township is named after him. His last public 616 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. appearance was as president of the German Society, at whose head he marched down Broadway. He was greatly respected by the community, and once during a riot the rioters gave way to him, shouting as he passed, " Three cheers for Baron Steuben." The Reformed Church may well be proud of his record in the war of independence, as he stands third (after Washington and Greene) in importance. After the Revolution the Reformed continued to show their love for their new country. Nine miles west of Reading is the Cacusi church, now called Main's church, at AVernersville. It had over its door an inscription placed there when it was built in 17G6 : "All who go in and out must be true to God and the king." After the war was over, one of the builders climbed up to it and cut out the word " king," and the inscription remains thus mutilated to this day, a silent witness to the patriot- ism of the membership of that church.* In 1789 coetus appointed a committee, consisting of Weyberg, Gros and Blumer, together with three elders, among them Colonel Farmer, to draft a memorial of congratulation to General Washington on his election as president. He gratefully replied to them, thanking them i'ov their support. When Washington was driven out of Philadelphia by the yel- low fever in 1793, he made his iiomc for several months * Many of them served in the Revolution, and ouo. Captain Cuurad Koli- ert, a great-ijrandfathor of the author, is buriol just west of the church THE COETUS AND CIVIL AFFAIRS. 617 in the family of Rev. Mr. Hermau, the pastor at Ger- mautowii. There is a tradition that he attended the Re- formed church then, and on one occasion took communion with the congregation. After Washington's death the Cincinnati society, founded in 1783 by the officers of the Revolutionary army, held the memorial service in the First Reformed church in Philadelphia, February 22, 1800, One of the most eloquent eulogies delivered on Washington's death was by Rev. Andrew Loretz, of North Carolina. CHAPTER VI.— SECTION II. ECCLESIASTICAL AFFAIRS DURING THE REVOLUTION. Fortunate was it for the coetus that it was prepared for sueh a sad time by three things : 1. It was a harmonious body, and had been since 1756. The six years of controversy (1749-1755) had been succeeded by twenty years of harmony. 2. The revival of Maryland had put the Church in a good state religiously. 3. The large addition of ministers (many of them excellent men) before the Revolution. This was very for- tunate, for during the Revolution very few were added, while some died. We have nowhere found any action taken i)y the coe- tus directly in favor of America. Perhaps they were the more careful about that, as their Church was to Eng- land, because of intermarriages with her and to whom the mini.sti'rs generally belonged, was (jiiiet. The South ECCLESIASTICAL AFFAIRS. 619 Holland synod made some enthusiastic statements of sym- pathy in 1780. The coetus' minutes reveal the gravity of the situation and the anxiety of the Church. Even before the war in 1775 the coetus ordered the last day of June to be a day of fasting and prayer in all the congregations. The coetal letter of that year asks the prayers of Holland for them. The next coetus (1776) reveals the sad condition of affairs. Philadelphia and Germantown were not represented on account of the war. During the British occupation of Philadelphia these congregations were entirely cut off. The next coetus (1777) mourns, that "on account of the war many a praiseworthy thing is omitted, especially tlie keeping of the Sabbath and Christian exercises in the family at home, and more is thought of weapons than of God's Word." Witner, in his coetal letter to the Hol- land fathers, suggests that they act as mediators between England and the colonies to bring about an early peace. In 1778 only a few ministers met at Lancaster, the rest being prevented by the war, and they transacted no business except the ordination of Runckel. In 1779 they managed to get together a coetus meeting at Lancaster, but there were many absentees on account of the war. Deeply affected by the conditions of tiie times, they pass the following action : " On account of the frequently pre- vailing yices and other irregularities in the cpugregatious it was resolved first of all that we acknowledge in deep 620 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. humility and self-denial our own entire un worthiness, and confess that without the grace of God we cannot accom- plish the very least. However, trusting to divine help, we resolved that an earnest and hearty exhortation be composed and printed, addressed to the congregations, all men in general and the members of our congregations in particular. We pledge ourselves, in the presence of the Chief Shepherd and Bishop, to employ more than ever before all earnestness and zeal, both in public sermons and in general conversation, and to become instruments by which the kingdom of Christ may be built up and the dark dominion of Satan be destroyed." A committee, composed of William Hendel, Pomp and Helffenstein, were appointed to prepare and print this exhortation. In 1780 no coetus meeting was held. In 1781 it was held again at Philadelphia. One of the most serious results was the reduction of sal- aries through the war. Thus Stahlschmidt says, when he resigned his charge to go to P^urope, that there were thou- sands of dollars due him for salary, but as sixty or sev- enty paper dollars were only equivalent to one silver one, he could for all this money scarcely procure a new coat for himself Doubly grateful to the ministers were the few donations sent by Holland in those needy times. A more hopeful tone appears in their coetus of 1783. They report to the deputies that a well-founded hope has arisen of an early peace, and that the Reformed and Pres- ECCLESIASTICAL AFFAIRS. 621 byterial religion will be recognized as the dominant faith among them. They thank God for hearing the prayer of all true republicans, and they hope that by their inde- pendence they will be brought nearer to Holland. CHAPTER VI.— SECTION III. THE NEW MINISTERS. These were very few. The Holland deputies sent only one during the war. Samuel Dubendorf. 1777. He had been pastor at Kolberg in Pommerania, Ger- many, and was an old man when he appeared before the deputies on November 28, 1775. They refused to send him to Pennsylvania because they had no call from a vacant congregation there, and besides he did not have proper testimonials. On March 8, 177G, he appeared before them again with a letter of recommendation from deputy Hubert and having proper testimonials. The dep- uties appointed him without the usual examination, as he had been in the ministry for so many years. He went to England, where he sailed from Portsmouth, and after a long voyage of twenty weeks he landed at New York. He had to stay there for some weeks before he could get a pass from General Howe to come to Pennsylvania, When he arrived at Philadelphia, Weyberg cordially welcomed him and advised him to supply the Germantown congre- gation. His call to it was confirmed by the coetus. May, THE NEW MINISTEES. 623 1777. He remained there for two years. But he was plundered by the British, losing all that he had, and be- came very poor. True, the affection of his members en- abled him to make up a part of the loss, but they were too much impoverished by the war to help much. As there was some dissatisfaction in his congregation, because some of the patriots suspected him of leaning toward England, since he had come over with the Hessians, he resigned. He had several calls, but, like John tlie Baptist, preferred preaching in the wilderness, on the borders of the Indians, in Lykens Valley. There he labored in great poverty and often in danger from the Indians. In 1781 the coe- tus, hearing of his needs, gave him $34. He wrote to Holland, asking for assistance. In 1783 they sent him $40. For this he wrote. May 6, 1784, a letter to them, thanking them and asking them to present an enclosed appeal to the Queen of Holland, which they did by send- ing it to her palace in " the Wood" at the Hague. He was present at the coetus of 1784. In that year he was called to Carlisle, but nobly declined, although finally, in 1790, he accepted a call there. After 1795 he returned to the Lykens Valley, and died at Selinsgrove, Pa. By his self-denying labors he founded the Church in that region, which ought to place some memorial of him at •his grave at Selinsgrove, Pa. The coetus received during this period two more min- isters, who iiad been educated in this («>(^,utry. 624 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. John Christian Stahlschmidt. 1777. He was born at Freudenberg, Nassau Siegen, Ger- many, March 3, 1740. When young he came under the influence of this mystics and thus incurred his father's displeasure, M'ho made him take a vow that he would give up all pietism. He felt dissatisfied with his vow and determined to leave home. So he secretly left home and found his way through Cologne to Amsterdam. He there shipped as a sailor on an East India merchantman. He clung to his Savior on shipboard, amid storm and ridi- cule. On June 3, 1760, he arrived at Batavia, Java. The ship then sailed to Canton, on which journey he passed through a terrific storm and at last arrived at Am- sterdam in June, 1761. He again sailed for the east to India. On this journey he passed through a severe illness. He returned to Amsterdam on June 1, 1765. He then visited his old home, where his father kindly received him. His wider experience and travel had broadened his narrow pietistic views. But he was still deeply religious. While at home he visited Tersteegen in August, 1766, and again in 1767. On March 13, 1770, he left home again and went to America. He landed in Philadelphia in August, 1770, where lie found a friend in the school-master of the Reformed church, who had known his parents. Dr. Weyberg, who was always THE NEW MINISTERS. 625 quick to notice any one especially spiritually minded, took an interest in him and urged him to study for the ministry. But he with great modesty feared the greatness of its responsibilities. He studied under Weyberg for a year, and also preached at Frankford. He came before the coetus in 1771, at Weyberg's solicitation. The coetus ordered him to continue his studies. But he felt his inability, and so became a tutor to a judge at Lebanon, where he did considerable preaching, especially for Buchep. There he also became acquainted with Stoy. Otterbein also took an interest in him. Then he studied with Hendel, whom he counted as one of the best preach- ers he had met in America. He was called in 1776 by the Germantowu congregation, when Helffenstein left. Heltf'enstein urged him to accept the call, as did Wey- berg, but he felt his inability, and refused. About this time the seven congregations, whom Wagner left near York, called him, and at Wagner's earnest request he took charge of them. He was examined by the coetus of 1777, preached his trial sernion on 1 Cor. 3 : 9, the text assigned him, was licensed, and Helffenstein and Wagner appointed to ordain him. lie soon found himself in the midst of the divisions caused by the war. Most of his people were patriots, but some influential men were To- ries. He therefore resigned, and, though it was danger- ous to cross tile seas, he sailed. His ship was detained in the Chesapeake Bay by English ships, but finally arrived 40 626 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. safely at St. Eustatius, one of the West India Islands. There he went on board a Dutch ship, October 9, 1779. After being almost shipwrecked by storms, he finally arrived safely at Portsmouth, England, where he took another ship for Amsterdam, landing there in March, 1780. He never returned to America, as he intended when he left, but was made their leader by the followers of Tersteegen. He died, June 1, 1826, aged 86 years, of mere old age. His last words were scarcely audible : "At length, at length the end appears Of all our sorrows, strife and tears, The new-born soul then sinks to rest Forever on his Savior's breast." His influence in Germany remained long after him. When the county of Siegen became rationalistic and its ministers were all rationalists, Stahlschmidt's followers by their prayer meetings brought that church back to orthodoxy. John William Runckel. 1778. He was born on April 28, 1749, at Oberiugelheim, in the Palatinate, and brought to America on October 1, 1764, when fifteen years old. He became school-teacher at Tulpehocken, when, in 1774, he began taking studying for the ministry under Hendel. He w^as licensed as a catcchist by the coetus of 1777, and preached at Ship- peusburg, Carlisle, Lower Settlement and Hummelstowu. THE NEW MINISTERS. 627 He did a remarkable work among the soldiers at Valley Forge, of which some very interesting traditions have come down in the family.* Although Runckel came before the coetus of 1777 and was examined, his ordination was postponed until the deputies approved. He again appeared at the coetus of 1778, when the few members who assembled at Lancaster examined him, and he was ordained by a committee, consisting of Hendel and Wag- ner, at Carlisle, July 30, 1778, before a large congrega- tion. His field was immense, covering parts of five coun- ties. It reached from Carlisle, in the west, through Rof kso and Maytown, to Manheim. In 1777, he says, he preached over 200 sermons and traveled 1500 miles. In 1781 he was called to Lebanon as Bucher's successor, and moved there on May 7, 1782, still, however, supplying Carlisle. On August 11, 1784, he was called to Freder- ick, Md., and left Lebanon on November 14, having trav- * Mr. Isaac Potts, the owner of the house occupied by Washington at Val- ley Forge as headquarters, although of a different creed, says of him : " He was a most devout Christian and a true patriot. He was one of the hardest workers in the cause of religion, and his presence among Washington's men was always attended with good results." When Baron Steuben began drill- ing the raw recruits, he had great difficulty in making them understand his orders, as he could not speak English. He struggled on with this, until one day he noticed Runckel, who he found spoke German. The latter translated the commands for Col. Harry Lee, and Steuben's difficulties vanished. Runckel was a man of great physical endurance. On one occasion, while fol- lowing Washington's army on foot from White Marsh to Skippackville, he found a soldier whose feet were so torn by the rough road that he could no longer march, and had fallen out of ranks. Ho took him on his shoulders and carried him to Norristown, where he had friends. These traditions were given me by William W. Kunkle, a descendant. 628 THE GEEMAJi KEFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. oled iu that field 13,316 miles. At Frederick be did much missionary work, beginning preaching at Rocky Hill, March 28, 1785; at Middletown, April 6, 1785, and at Glades, Short Hill and Manor, April 22, 1785. He made a tour through the Virginia churches in 1785 and 1786. In 1787 Rev. Mr. Schneider, of Albany, came to Frederick, ostensibly to collect funds for a church. A party was formed in the congregation in his favor, who tried to get Runckel away. This division continued in the church till 1800. He was pastor at Germantown, 1802-1805 ; at New York, 1805-1812, and of the Em- mittsburg charge, 1815. In 1819 he retained only Get- tysburg, where he died, November 5, 1832. John H. Weikel. He was an independent minister and a most eccentric man, who brought the Church into disgrace. He appeared before the coetus of 1774, but was refused. He was called to Boehm's and Wentz churches in 1776. At the beginning of the Revolution he preached a sermon on .Ecclesiastes 4 : 13 : " Better is a poor and wise child, than an old and foolish king, who will no more be admon- ished." This produced so great an excitement in his charge that he had to resign ultimately. He was often seen, after having turned his horse into an enclosure in front of his house, firing pistols over his head from the windows, so as to train hitii to the fire in case he should be used for war. It has been suggested that his mind THE NEW MINISTERS. 629 was at times affected. A Hessian captain, in a letter of January 18, 1778, speaks of him as having given up preaching and gone to highway robbing. This may not have been true, but there is no doubt of his eccentricities. Coetus was greatly scandalized that one of its congre- gations should take up with such a man, and censured the congregation, but with little effect. CHAPTER VII. THE COETUS AFTER THE REVOLUTION. SECTION I. THE MINISTERS OF THE COETUS. A.— The Last Ministers Sent from Holland. 1785. The deputies sent this year three ministers from the canton of the Grisons in eastern Switzerland. They were Andrew Loretz, Peter Paul Pernisius and Beruhard Willy. Of the last two we will speak under the head of the disciplined. Andrew Loretz. (There was an Andrew Loretz, who matriculated at Heidelberg, June 22, 1750, and at Basle, October 5, 1751, as having been born at Chur.) He had been minister for thirteen years in the barony of Haldenstein, and brought good testimonials from the antistes and his former con- gregation. The classical commissioners were appointed (September 14, 1784) by the deputies to examine him. He met with them, and was appointed. He sailed the THE MINISTERS OF THE COETUS. 631 same week on the ship Paragon for Baltimore.* He was called to the Tulpehocken and Lebanon charges. But he did not stay long, for he left in April, 1786, to return to Switzerland. The coetus gave two reasons for this : 1. His Swiss dialect was so broad that many of his con- gregations could not understand him. 2. He found the expense of bringing his family to America too great. Coetus gave him a testimonial, when he went back to Europe, March 26, 1786. For this giving of a testimo- nial the deputies find fault with the coetus. 1787. Lebrecht Frederick Herman. He was born at Gusten, in Anhalt Cotha, October 9, 1761, and was confirmed there by Rev. Mr. Paltenius. He spent six years at the Orphans' Homes of Franke in Halle, and then three years at the university there, study- ing Reformed theology under Professor Mursina in the Reformed gymnasium at Halle. In 1782 he was called as assistant minister at Bremen. After great difficulty to get to Amsterdam on account of floating ice, he appeared before the deputies and was examined, March 15, 1786. They speak of him as a young man of great promise. He arrived in America in August, 1786, and was called to * The Church records in Baltimore state that Loretz and Willy arrived there on December 21, 1784. As they were without any means to continue their journey, the elders of the Baltimore congregation not only paid their bill at the inn " To the Green Tree," but also sent them to Pennsylvania on four horses, spending £23 for their entertainment. 632 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. the Eustou charge. In 1790 he accepted a call to Ger- mantown aud Fraukford. But as preaching iu two languages was burdensome, he accepted (1800) a call to Swamp, Pottstown and Vincent, which charge he held till his death, January 30, 1848. He, like Hendel and Wey- berg, paid special attention to the training of young men for the ministry. Soon after his arrival he presented young Samuel Weyberg, the son of Dr. Weyberg, deceased, to the coetus as one of his students asking for examina- tion. Before his death he had prepared thirteen for the ministry. George Troldenier. He was born at Anhalt Cotha iu 1 754. Like Her- man, he studied at Halle, and l)elonged to the church at Bremen. With Herman he appeared before the deputies, March 2-17, 1786, and landed in America with Herman in August, 1786. He was called to York, to succeed Wagner. But at the coetus of 1788 complaints came in from ]>art of his congregation that he was hot tempered and preached four or five times on the same text. The coetus felt the trouble was due to his ignorance of Penn- sylvania customs, and counseled the congregation to peace. At the coetus of 1 790 he was located at Gettysburg, hav- ing left Y(»rk, and in 17!ll he was called to Baltimore. He went, October 13, 1791, and found the congregation dissatisfied and scattered on account of the building of the new church. The church prospcM'ed under him, but he soon died of consumption, December 12, 1800. THE MINISTERS OF THE COETUS. 633 1788. Dietrich Christian Pick. He was the last of the ministers sent over by Holland. He appeared before the deputies, November 7, 1787. He brouo-ht testimonials from Cassel that he had matriculated at Marburg, and also from Gottingen, and that he had been a rector of school at Vache in Hesse. He arrived at New York before February 26, 1788, when he wrote to Weyberg, saying that he had arrived in New York without any money, and asked for $40. He enclosed in his appeal letters from the deputies, and also from Rev. Dr. Gros, of New York. Weyberg replied, March 4, that the deputies had not notified him of Pick's coming, and that the gift of $40 would be an impossibility, as the Pennsylvania congregations were poor. He says he would bring the matter before the next coetus. He also stated that the congregations in the coetus were supplied with ministers, and Pick had better seek a place among the Dutch of New York, if he could. Pick replied on April 8, denouncing Weyberg and stating that he had written to Holland, complaining about their treatment of him by Weyberg and the Pennsylvania brethren. The coetus of 1788 took up the matter, upheld Weyberg, and censured Pick for writing such a letter to Weyberg. They tell hira that as he had sent Wey berg's letter to Holland, they would also send his thither to the deputies. The depu- ties acquiesce in the judgment of the coetus. Pick never 634 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. entered the service of the coetus, but remained in New York. He was pastor at Cauojoharie and Stone Arabia, 1788-1790, and was suspended from the ministry in 1802. He was an eloquent orator. With Pick the list of the ministers sent over to Penn- sylvania by the Holland Church closes. They sent over in all thirty-seven ministers.* B.— Ministers who Joined the Coetus in America. 1785. John Herman Wynckhaus. He was born at Altena in Westphalia, November 26, 1758. When fifteen years old he attended the Latin school at Liraburg, then the university of Duisburg, from September 26, 1776, to September 16, 1779. He was examined and received as a candidate of the Suderland classis, December 7, 1779, and ordained at Berchum in Limburg, August 17, 1780, where he became pastor. On account of ill health he resigned, after serving the con- gregation for two years and three months. When he was restored to health again, he determined to come to Amer- ica, and on September 21, 1783, he started from his home for Amsterdam, where he arrived on October 14. He sailed, November 2, and arrived at Delaware Bay, Jan- * The deputies were in correspondence with Christian Lewis Becker from 1785 on. In 1787 it was expected he would be sent with Herman and Trol- denier to start a school, but it was postponed. He came over in 1793, the year after the dissolution of the coetus. THE MINISTERS OF THE COETUS. 635 uary 22, 1784. But the severe cold had frozen up the bay, so that the vessel could get no farther. He remained on the vessel frozen in the ice until March 6, when he decided to travel over the ice for the shore. He then came overland to Philadelphia, where he arrived, March 14, and was kindly received by Weyberg. The vessel was never heard of again, having probably foundered in the ice, carrying down twenty persons. When he heard of his providential escape he said, " God be praised that my life has been mercifully spared." On March 28 he received a call to the congregations at Witpen and Trappe, which had been vacant for four years. He applied to coetus in 1784, but his case was referred to Holland. The deputies exam- ined into the matter, and found he had left his former charge because of lack of support, and so he was admitted a full member of the coetus of 1785. He left Witpen and Trappe in 1787, went to Saucou and Springfield, and was later called to be the successor of his friend and patron Weyberg at Philadelphia. He must have been a very remarkable young man to have been called so soon to the largest and most influential church in the coetus. He preached his introductory sermon on September 26, 1790. In 1793 the yellow fever broke out in Philadelphia. While praying with Mr. Schreiner, the school-master of his church, he became ill with it. He became better, but ventured to attend Mr. Schreiner's funeral, took a relapse and died on October 3, 1793. Rev. Dr. Helmuth, the 636 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. Lutheran pastor of Philadelphia, wrote a beautiful poem on his death. 1787. Anthony Hautz. He was born, August 4, 1758, in Germany. His father came to America when he was ten years old, settling in what is now Lebanon county. He learned the trade of tailor, but Hendel saw in him the makiug of a minister. He studied under Hendel. He became a catechist in 1786 at Cocalico, Muddy Creek, Reyers and Zel- tenreich. At the coetus of 1787 they called him. He passed an excellent examination, and coetus, without waiting to consult Holland, at once ordained him, but they required him to sign a special formnla. When the deputies heard of this, they were angry, especially as his formula contained no reference to the Netherlands confessions. The coetus replied to them that this formula was not imposed on him to give him room for greater lib- erty of doctrine, but on the contrary to be a restraint against it, as some of the brethren had been suspicious of false doctrine creeping in. Coetus finally confessed it was a hasty decision and stated that remonstrances were raised against this in the meeting, but the majority were in favor of it. In 1788 he was called to Harrisburg, becoming the first regular pastor of the church. He was pastor at Carlisle 1798-1804, and in Seneca county, N. Y., 1804- 1815. THE MINISTERS OF THE COETUS. 637 1788. George Adam Gueting. He presented himself to the coetus of 1788 for ordi- nation. He had already been laboring very acceptably as a catechist in Maryland. Pomp says he expected to oppose him at the coetus, as he looked on him as a vision- ary, but coetus ordained him. The deputies were very much surprised at this act. The coetus, however, stated that they do so in view of the great scarcity of ministers in Maryland and Virginia. He became pastor at Antietam before 1781. He continued a member of the coetus up to 1804, but never attended a meeting. He was then ex- pelled from the synod. He died, June 28, 1812. Lewis Chitaka. He had been an Augustiniau monk in Switzerland, but had left that faith and become Reformed. He applied to the deputies in 1785, was given a donation and sent to Pennsylvania as a school-master. When he arrived he applied to Weyberg, who recommended him to the coetus, April 27, 1785. The coetus ordered him to continue his studies, which he did under Hendel and Weyberg. He was again examined in 1786 and allowed to preach, but was not yet ordained. The coetus reports this to deputies, saying that he arrived at Pennsylvania utterly destitute, and they spent $77 for him and asked the deputies to aid in paying this expense. The deputies replied that they 638 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. had sent him to America to be a school-master, not a min- ister. But in 1788 the deputies were willing;, and he was ordained. He had been charged, October 23, 1787, at Nolton, of still holding to some Catholic incantations to cure a child, but he seems to have gotten over all these and done excellent work as a Protestant pastor. He had labored before under Wack's supervision in New Jer- sey, and in 1788 became pastor of the congregations at Nolton and Hartwick, where he remained four or five years, and was then called to Tohickon, Springfield and Indian Creek. He was present at the coetus of 1 789. He died about 1793. 1789. Philip Reinhold Pauli. He was born at Magdeburg, June 22, 1742, and came of a family famous for Reformed ministers in Germany. His grandfather had been court preacher at the Reformed cathedral at Halle.* His father was consistorialrath and court preacher of the Count of Anhalt-Bernburg. Ho studied at the Joachimthal, Reformed gymnasium at Ber- lin, and, it is said, also at Leipsic. He studied theology at the Reformed gymnashun at Halle under Mursinna. After traveling through Europe with a wealthy uncle, he came to this country in 1783, and became teacher of Latin in the academy at Philadelphia, now the University of Pennsylvania. He a})plied to the coetus of 1786 forordi- * See m^ History of the Reformed Church of Germany, p. 422. THE MINISTERS OP THE COETUS. 639 nation, but his examination was not satisfactory. The deputies, however, for some reason grant permission, March 12, 1787, for his ordination. At the coetus of 1787 the Frankfort congregation applied for him as pas- tor, as he had been preacliing for them while he had been teaching in Philadelphia. He became pastor at Witpen and Worcester, 1789-1793, and after that at Reading, where he died on November 12, 1839. 1791. Jonathan Rahauser. He was born in Dover township, York county, Decem- 14, 1764. He was a farmer by trade up to his 21st year, when he determined to study for the ministry. He studied under Hendel, at Lancaster, August 17, 1785, till March 22, 1789, when he preached his first sermon at Bier's church on II Timothy, 3 : 16-17. At the coetus of 1790 five congregations beyond the Blue mountains around Sha- mokin and the Susquehanna sent a delegate with an earnest petition for his ordination. Coetus examined bim and reported his case to Holland, asking for an early decision, as Shamokiu was in danger of falling into the hands of ad- venturers, like Spangenberg. As no reply had come in by the coetus of 1791, coetus took the responsibility of ordain- ing him, June 27, 1791, at the hands of Hendel, Helifrich and Blumer. In 1792 he was called to Hagerstowu, where he labored till his death, September 25, 1817, 640 the german reformed church in u. s. John Philip Stock. He was from Treysa near Ziegenheim in Hesse. He matriculated at Duisburg university, October 6, 1786. Their record says he went to Virginia, but he went to Pennsylvania. He came to Pennsylvania in 1789. At the coetus of 1790 the York congregation requested his ordination. Coetus referred it to Holland. As no word came, they ordained him at the next meeting of the coetus in 1791, together with Rahauser. In 1792 he was called to Shippensburg, Chambersburg and Sherer's. 1792. John Theobald Faber, Jr. He was born at Goshenhoppen, September 24, 1771, the oldest son of Rev. J. T. Faber. He studied the clas- sics under Rev. Mr. Melsheimer, a Lutheran minister of York, and then theology uuder Hendel. Old and New Goshenhoppen presented a call to him at the coetus of 1792. A committee ou examination, consisting of Hen- del, Helffrich and Pomp, reported that his examination in doctrine had not been satisfactory, yet out of regard to the Goshenhoppen congregation, which had borne the expense of his education, and to his widowed mother, he was ordained. The deputies somewhat doubtingly express their approval. He was pastor at Goshenhoppen, 1792- 1807, and then of Bethany and New Holland charges, 1807-1809. He returned to Goshenhoppen, where he THE MINISTERS OP THE COETUS. 641 died, February 10, 1833, stricken, like his father, with apoplexy in the church. 1792. John Mann * He came before the coetus of 1792, when the congre- gations of Lower Saucon and Springfield asked for his ordination. The committee reported that they found him well grounded in the sciences and pure in the doctrines of the Church. Blumer and Helifrich were ordered to ordain him. In 1795 he had trouble in these congregations. He afterwards became pastor at Mt. Bethel, Northampton county, and then returned to farming. His name is last mentioned in the coetus' minutes in 1802, when it was dropped for non-attendance on coetus. He was buried at Mt. Bethel, Pa. In all coetus received 31 ministers who were not sent over by the Holland deputies, f These, with the 37 sent from Holland, make 68 in all who belonged to the coetus. C— The Disciplined. Peter Paui. Pernisius. 1785. He was from the canton of the Grisons. He had been j)astor in the Engadine for thirty-six years.| He appeared * There is a John Mann mentioned as an elder of the coetus of 1784. t Samuel Weyberg and William Hendcl, Jr., applied to the coetus of 1792 and were examined, but wore not received into the synod till the year after coetus closed ( I79">). I There was a Peter Paul I'ernisius, who was pastor at Sylva Plana in the Grisons from 1745-1753. 41 642 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. in a very needy condition before the deputies, September 14-15, 1784. He was accepted and went to America, accompanied by his daughter. He was commissioned by the deputies. After his arrival he was a constant source of trouble to the coetus. They complained to Holland that he was too old to be acceptable to the congregations. With difficulty they secured him a place finally in the Lehigh charge, where he remained for six months, but one congregation after another forsook him. Then he went to Philadelphia and tried to practice medicine. Then Brownback's, Wentz and Pottstown called him, but Wentz soon gave him up. In July, 1788, he was charged with the murder of a cattle driver near his home, as he was found with the dead man. He was saved from punish- ment through the intercession of Weyberg, the evidence being circumstantial. But it cost coetus |68.88, which it asked the deputies to aid in paying. Pernisius was pub- licly excluded from the coetus in 1789. Bernhard Willy. He was also from the canton of the Grisons, liaviiiir been pastor at Malladio. He appeared before the doj>u- ties with Loretz, November 15, 1784, and after his arrival he was appointed to Reading. But although he had a wife in Europe, he again married. When this was found out, a committee, consisting of Hendel, Dallicker and Helffrich, went to Reading and found the charges true. Coetus therefore excluded him in 1786. He went to Vir- THE MINISTERS OF THE COETUS. 643 ginia, where he seems to have tried to redeem his life aud character. He was a fine scholar, writing Latin freely, outlining his sermons in that language. He preached over a wide district, " from Wylie county to tlie Potomac and from the Blue liidge to the Alleghenies." He lived at Woodstock, Va., then in Pendelton and Wythe coun- ties, Va. At the end of his life he returned to W^ood- stock. Harbaugh says he left behind him in manuscript "Lectures on the Heidelberg Catechism." He died in May, 1810. CHAPTER YII.— SECTION II. THE INDEPENDENTS. Cyriacus Spangenberg von Reidemeister. He was the most remarkable case of a religious adven- turer of the purest water. Fortunately the coetus, in spite of importunity, remained firm in rejocting him, and thus saved itself from disgrace. Harbaugh errs in placing him among the Fathers of the Reformed Church, for he never was a member of the coetus. He was a native of Hesse and a cousin of Dubendorf. He came to this country before 1780, for he wrote to Holland about his cousin's condition in that year. He studied for a time with Boos at Reading, but although he besought Boos to ordain him, he would not do it. He asked the coetus of 1783 to ordain him. But as he had already, although unordaiued, administered baptism and had asked Boos to ordain him, his irregular conduct made coetus suspicious, especially as his actions were more those of a soldier than of a minister. In 1784 he again applied to coetus. His perseverance made coetus more favorable. They did not give liim a positive refusal, but referred the matter to the deputies. Their reply, January 28, 1785, was unfavorable. Tliey had their suspicious about Spangenberg and asked whetiier THE INDEPENDENTS. 645 he had ever belonged to the garrison at Deveuter, Hol- land. Meanwhile Spangenberg, evidently fearing their answer, succeeded in getting into the ministry in an irreg- ular way. At the earnest intercession of Dubendorf, Michael, the independent Reformed minister, ordained Spangenberg, although he had no authority to do so. Spangenberg then went up the Susquehanna and preached at Shamokin, Row's, Mahantango and Middle Creek in the latter part of 1785. His bad character soon revealed itself, as he was about marrying, when it was found out that he already had a wife in Europe. He then went to Conagocheaque Valley, near Chambersburg, where he preached to the Grindstone Hill charge and other con- gregations. He then went still farther west, and in 1795 was at Bedford and Berlin. At Berlin, at a congrega- tional meeting, where an effort was made to get rid of him, he rose in the chancel and stabbed the elder who pro- posed this, named Glessner. For this he was arrested and found guilty of murder, April 27, 1795. He was hung, October 10 — a just judgment. Coetus deserves great credit in keeping such a man out of the Church. Frederick William Vandersloot. He was born at Anhalt Zcrbst and had be(ui for two and a half years inspector of the Joachimthal Reformed gymnasium at Berlin. While there he had at times preached in the Reformed cathedral at Berlin, where the royal family of Prussia worshiped, so that he must have 6^46 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. been a man of some prominence. He came, according to Weiser, in 1782. His first field was the Dryland charge in Northampton county. He began preaching at Old Goshenhoppen, December 11, 1783, and New Goshen- hoppen, March 4, 1784. The coetus of 1784 granted him permission to supply these congregations, and referred his case to Holland before admitting him. The deputies inquired about him at Berlin and received a favorable reply, only they said he had not yet been ordained. Meanwhile he married, although having a wife in Europe, and for this coetus refused to admit him in 1785. He left Goshenhoppen in October, 1786, and went back to Northampton county, where he died in 1803. Lewis Lupr. He was born on January 7, 1733, and came to Penn- sylvania, taking the oath of allegiance on September 29, 1753. He was at first school-teacher, but as ministers were scarce, he began preaching. He never applied to coetus for ordination. In 1786 he was at Lebanon as its pastor, preaching also at Blaser's, near Elizabethtown, May town, Manheim (beginning 1785) and Knpho (begin- ning 1781). His last sermon he preached at Rapho, with his head tied up in a handkerchief. The diary of tiie Hebron Moravian church, near Lebanon, according to Prof. Hinke, gives some interesting data about him. Thus, on JiMie 11, 1791, the Moravian minister attended Lupp's catechetical examination at Lebanon, preparatory THE INDEPENDENTS. 647 to admission to the Church. First, he says, Lupp preached a preparatory sermon, and following this fifty children were twice asked to repeat all the questions in the cate- chism, which they had to answer. During this important ceremony there was throughout a continuous loud weep- ing, and the young hearts were completely carried away with it. It took six hours before all was finished. The diary says Lupp's piety was somewhat of the legalistic type, as he was constantly attacking sin with the thunders of the law, but twice speaks of the evangelical character of his discourses at funerals. He laid the corner-stone of the Lebanon church on June 26, 1792, and the church was dedicated on May 8, 1796, at which sermons were preached by Becker, Plendel and Pauli. Lupp also preached at the Mountain church. He died June 28, 1798. Henry Giese. He was born at Lichtenau in Upper Saxony, Germany. April 13, 1757. He was educated at the Reformed gym- nasium at Hersfeld, and then sj^ent two years at Marburg university. He came to America in 1776 and remained four years near New York, and then went to Virginia. In 1782 he was at Frederick, intending to go back to Europe. But Henop, whom he met, impressed on him the need of ministers in America, and he stayed. He sup- plied several congregations in Virginia, as Short Hill, Goose Creek and one at South Mountain. He applied to the coetus in 1787 for ordination, but coetus remanded him 648 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. 8. back to his school. Nevertheless he kept ou preaching, residing first at Frederick county, INId., and then in Lou- don county, Va. Later he became pastor at Berlin, Pa., 1794, his first baptismal entry there being April 26, 1795. He died at Berlin, March 24, 1845. Jacob Schneider. He was born in Europe, and was first teacher and then minister in New York state. He was present at the coetns of 1789 with Gros, and is there reported as coming from Albany. In 1787 he visited Frederick ostensibly to raise money for a church, and ingratiated himself into Ruuckel's congregation, so that a party wanted to get rid of Ruuckel and call him. This not proving successful, he afterward became principal of an academy at Leesburg, Loudon county, Va., and later preaching at Lovettsville and adja- cent places. He went to Woodstock, then to Leesburg, where he died, 1826, and was buried at Lovettsville, Va. John Michael Kern. He was pastor of the German lieformed church of New York, 1763-1771, and at Montgomery, N. Y., 1771-8. After the Revolution he came to IVnnsylvania, where he became pastor of Indian Field, 1782-1788, where he died. Andrew Loretz. In the " Fathers of the Reformed Church" Rev. Dr. Heisler makes this minister the son of Rev. Andrew Ijo- retz.* We are inclined to make liiin the same jhm'soii, * See page 61)0. THE INDEPENDENTS. 649 although the matter has not yet been settled. There is such a striking likeness between the early part of their lives that they appear to us the same. Nevertheless, for lack of exact proof we place him here, as they may be dif- ferent persons. He was born at Chur in Switzerland in 1761, and studied at Kaufbeuren, Bavaria, up to 1779. He came to America in 1784, landing at Baltimore. About 1786 he married a Mrs. Schaeffer (whose maiden name was Lehman, of Hagerstown) at Myerstown, Pa. In the autumn of 1786 or 1787 he appeared in North Carolina, in Lincoln county, living near Lincolnton. He itinerated all over North and South Carolina, preaching, administering the sacraments and catechising. To him, together with Suther, the present Reformed Church in North Carolina owes its existence. He was a man of genial disposition and fine education, speaking French and Latin fluently. In the German he was quite eloquent, and his prayers were long remembered for their unction. He died on a Sabbath, aged 51. He had preached at St. Paul's ciuirch tliat day, and rode fifteen miles to his home to die that night, as he predicted he would.* * We find that we have omitted several of the independent Relormtd min- isters in our previous sltetches, as follows : John Jacob Diilenberger was the pastor of the Efjypt charge (1752-1755). During those three years he bap- tized 18 persons, lie was a Swiss by birth There was a Rev. Mr. Martin, also a Swiss, who was perhaps the first minister in North Carolina, preaching there in 1759. He also preached in South Carolina. There was also a Rev. Mr. Du Pert, a Huguenot, who preached in 17(54 in North Carolina. There was a Rev. Mr. Frederick, a Swiss, who supplied Tempelman's charge after his death, about the year 17fiO. But he did not stay long, as he was of high temper, and went back to Europe. CHAPTER VII.— SECTION III. THE UNITED BRETHREN CHURCH AND THE REFORMED. Between these two Churches there has long been a con- troversy. The United Brethren claim Ott^rbein as the founder of their Church, while the Reformed claim that he never left the Reformed Church. Do the new documents throw any light on the subject? The first thing to be noticed is that this subject is a different one from the topics before mentioned, as " Pietism in the Reformed Church," and " the Division in the Re- formed Congregation at Baltimore." For although these were factors in preparing the way for the origin of the United Brethren Church, yet they were not the movement itself. The United Brethren Church was a larger move- ment than that of the class meetings of the Reformed in Maryland (1770-1776). Tiiere was in addition to these the Methodist influence of Asbury, and also the Mennonite influence of Boehm, both of which became factors in form- ing the United Brethren Church, and were altogether out- side of the Reformed Church. It is also to be remembered (and this is an important point) that between the Reformed revival, 1 770-1 77G, and the organization of tiie United Brethren Church (which they say took i)lace in 17S1)), the THE UNITED BRETHREN CHURCH. 651 Revolutionary w..r iuterveued. This, according to the records of the Reformed and also of other denominations, was a blight on all religious activity. The minds of the people were diverted from religion to war, and a bloody war lowered spirituality. The result was that when Mary- land came out of the war, the state of piety was low, and was all the lower because of the French influence during the war, which made infidelity popular. The United Brethren Church, if it was founded in 1789, came in as a different movement from the Reformed movement of about fifteen years before. This subject of the relations between the United Breth- ren and the Reformed resolves itself into two topics. 1 . Did the congregation of which Otterbein was pastor belong to the coetus, or did it not? Tiie United Brethren claim that it was always independent, and on this plea they gained the church property in Baltimore. 2. Did Otterbein leave the Reformed Church and join the United Brethren Church and become its founder ? 1. Did the Otterbein congregation belong to the Re- formed coetus ? If so, it was a Reformed congregation. Here again we find two classes of records : first, those of the property ; second, those of the coetus. a. The property records. Drury, in iiis life of Otterbein, says that tlie property of the Otterbein church was deeded to three per- sons, but not as trustees, thus making it private property and independent. But he upsets his whole argument by 652 THE GEEMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. saying that Otterbein, the last of them, by his will deeded it to two trustees, " to take all legal measures to vest the said property in the elders, trustees and members of the German Evangelical Reformed Church."* That very clearly put the legal title to it in the Reformed Church. If the trustees did not vest it the Reformed Church, they violated the trust reposed in them by Otterbein. b. The records of the coetus. These very clearly show that the congregation considered itself as belonging to the coetus. Just after the division, 1771, it sent delegates to the coetus, asking to be recognized. And the coetus' acts on a ques- tion that must have been suggested by them (for the other congregation would not have brought it up, as it would have been prejudicial to their cause), namely, " Whether a congregation which has accepted a minister outside of the coetus, and without the consent and apj)roval of the coetus, is to be regarded as a congregation under the coetus." The coetus said no, and tliis was a direct blow at the old congregation, who liad Wallauer as pastor. The coetus also took action brought up by Otterbcin's congregation (for the other congregation would not have suggested it), namely, " Whether the coetus should take care of mem- bers of a congregation who subjected themselves to the coetus and desired to be supplied with a minister." This refers evidently to the new congregation. All this reveals how they were pressing their suit for r(>cognition by the * Drury, Life of Otterbein, pnge 165. THE UNITED BEETHEEN CHUECH. 653 coetus. If they wanted to be independent, they never would have done this. At the coetus of 1773 the congre- gation again sent delegates^ and accepting the decision of tlie coetus, called Hendel. If they were not under the coetus, they would not have pressed the call to Hendel. In 1775 Otterbein sent a report to the coetus, showing that he and the congregation considered themselves under the coetus. " Coetus also after mature deliberation deemed it advisable for Rev. Mr. Otterbein to continue his work in the congregation at Baltimore. It is evident from the report that his labors were blessed, and the opposing party is becoming quiet." This gave official recognition to the Otterbein church. During the Revolution the Baltimore congregation that was in the coetus was the Otterbein con- gregation, not the other. They alone report to the coetus and send delegates to it. In 1779 Boehme became pastor of the old congregation, and they came back to the coetus. In 1784 the quarrel was resumed between the congregations on the question whether, as both were now in the coetus, they should not be united again. Coetus in 1784 decided that both congregations should be recognized as long as they clung to the doctrines and customs of the Reformed Church. During the period of the congregation before the organization of the United Brethren Church in 1789, the old congregation was outside of the coetus almost half the time because of independent pastors, while the Otterbein congregation was in the coetus all the time. We there- fore conclude that the congregation was in the coetus. 654 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. 2. Did Otterbein leave the Reformed Church and joiu the United Brethren ? The records of the coetiis reveal that during its existence he was among the most regular in attendance. After the formation of the Baltimore con- gregation he was present in 1771, 1773, 1775, 1776, 1782, 1783, 1784, 1788, 1791, 1797, 1800 and 1806. The United Brethren claim that he attended their conferences and took an active part in them. That may be true, but that did not necessitate his leaving the Reformed. He had been accustomed to such meetings in the Reformed Church in Germany without a thought of leaving their Church. Our opponents say, however, that he assisted in licensing ministers of their Church. Thus they quote a license of his to a minister during the Refcrmed meetings of 1776. But this was a personal ministerial license to preach, given long before their Church was started. This may have been somewhat irregular, but necessity often compelled ministers to do then what would be utterly irregular now. Otterbein felt that there were so few ministers in Mary- land that he licensed this man on his own responsibility. And yet he was doing about what the coetus had done. The coetus had no right to ordain Schwob, without the approval of Holland, but it did. Coetus never considered Otterbein's act in licensing the minister irregular, for it never took it up. It is altogether probable that Otterbein felt that as the Holland fathers seemed to consider their territory only Pennsylvania, and refused jurisdiction over THE UNITED BRETHREN CHURCH. 655 other colonies, sometliiug must be done to supply ministers for such needy places as Maryland. It only shows that he became more of an evangelist than a pastor. But he did need to leave the Reformed Church to do this. Their argument falls unless they can point to some fact where he says he left the Church in which he WwS born and labored. 6. His correspondence. There is an exceedingly interesting letter of his to Holland in 1788. It seems he and his congregation gained the idea that the old congrega- tion had written to Holland against them so as to have the Holland Church cast them out. In that letter Pomp had charged him with being the instigator of the division in the old congregation. Otterbein showed that he was in Europe when this occurred, and had nothing to do with it. But his letter clearly reveals his anxiety to be considered a member of the coetus under the Holland Church. A very interesting point in it is his adherence to Calvinism. Pomp had charged in his letter that Otterbein was not a Calvinist, and therefore ought not to be recognized as Re- formed. Otterbein replies that he is a Calvinist, although not a high Calvinist, as he does not hold to the double election. But all this shows Otterbein's desire to be in the in the coetus, and not independent of it. What happened after the close of the coetus (1793) does not properly belong to this history. But we may add in regard to the subject that Otterbein was Reformed to the end, for the following considerations : 656 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. 1. His action in willing the church property to the Reformed at liis death. Now if he had gone over to the United Brethren, he would have given it to them, not to the Reformed. He evidently considered it was Reformed property, although his successors in that church did not. 2. In doctrine he claimed to be Calvinistic, while the United Bretlireu were Arminiau. 3. He was strict in his catechization, as his catechu- mens bear testimony, while the United Brethren sneered at that system of educational religion. 4. He did not have a loud voice suited for noisy meet- ings, such as the United Brethren held. This Meakuess was brought out when the Philadelphia congregation called him. 5. He was present at the Reformed coetus long after 1789, when the United Brethren Church was formed. He was present in 17iJl, 171)7, 1800 and even as late as 1806. He was present at it one year later than he was last present at the United Brethren conferences (1805). 6. He declared that he was Reformed to the end, while the United Brethren have not brought a single statement of his where he says he left the Reformed Church. Rev. Isaac Gerliart, one of our ministers, visited him in August, 1812, and Otterbein said to him : " I also am a member of the synod of the German Reformed Church, but cannot attend on account of old age." Now if Otterbein had left the Church, he never would have said that, THE UNITED BRETHREN CHURCH. 657 The ITnited Brethren make much of a scene in the coetiis of 1806, when Becker attacked Otterbein on the floor of coetus, and he h'ft. But Otterbein knew that Becker represented only a party in the coetus, namely, the anti-pietistic party. He also knew that Becker had been trained under the rationalizing influence of Prof. Mur- sinna in Halle, which was not favorable to aggressive piety. He had many old friends in the coetus who sym- pathized with his Pietism, as Hendel and Wagner. He knew the membership of the coetus too well to leave it on account of the statement of one member. Besides, his remark to Gerhart and his willing of the property prove he considered himself Reformed long after this. For these reasons we believe that Otterbein never left the coetus, and was a minister of our Church to the end. Nor should the property in Baltimore be in the hands of the United Brethren, but in the hands of the Reformed. Indeed the Maryland courts evidently decided that it must be Reformed, by requiring the congregation to use the Heidelberg Catechism, which we understand they do not do, thus violating honesty and right. The United Brethren have claimed that Otterbein was put out of the Reformed Church for being a revivalist. This is wholly false. There is no action of this kind. On the contrary, when Lange attacked his Pietism before coe- tus, coetus very summarily told liange to seek a charge else- where, and exonerated Otterbein, resenting such an attack 42 658 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. ou one of its oldest and most influential members. A year before the United Brethren Chnrch was founded, coetus writes a beautiful tribute about him. In the coetal letter of 1788 they write : "Otterbein has grown old, gray, and is almost disabled in the hard service of tlie gospel in America. He has done much good, has zealously toiled for the salvation of many souls. And the aim and j)ur- pose of his administration, though perliaps it did not strictly accord with the sentiments of all, is edification and blessing; for what else could it be? He is a servant of God who stands at the gates of eternity to render an account of his stewardship." No more beautiful tribute could be given to any one. No, Otterbein was not expelled by the coetus, but highly honored by her. CHAPTER VII.— SECTION IV. THE CAUSES OP THE SEPARATION PROM HOLLAND. The coetiis finally separated from the mother Church, after being under her supervision for sixty-four years (1729-1793), and having received donations from her for sixty-three years (1730-1793). The cause of this separa- tion was not any quarrel between them. Nor was it any difference in doctrine or worship, for on these points they were alike. They gradually drifted apart, owing to vari- ous causes, until the final breach was made. The follow- ing were the main reasons : 1. A gengraphical reason. They were so far apart, separated by the great Atlantic ocean, Avhich was hardly navigable during the winter season. Hence they were with difficulty able to communicate with each other. As a general rule it took about a year for the American churches to get a reply to their requests from Holland, and often longer. Sometimes they received no reply at all on importiuit matters, as letters were often lost by shipwreck or carelessness. To avoid this the deputies asked, in 1757, that coetus send duplicate copies of its minutes by different vessels, and repeated this request again in 17G9. Finally the coetus became weary of the 660 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. continual delays in correspondence, which were always annoying and often harmful to the Church. This was especially true during tlie Revolution, and from 1787- 1789, when Holland was overrun by armies, and the deputies often were kept from meeting. 2. A difference of language. The Hollanders spoke Dutch and the Pennsylvaniaus German. Thus, when the German letters from Pennsylvania came to Holland, the deputies had to have them translated, which always took time and often postponed important decisions. The dep- uties, in 1749, ask Boehm that the coetus' letters be in Latin or Dutch or in German, written in Latin letters. And in 1752 they repeat this request for Dutch or Latin letters. As a result a number of the reports of coetus are sent in Dutch or Latin, Stoy especially delighting to write in the latter language. However, by tlie latter end of 1759 the deputies grow tired of Stoy's Latin, and request no more Latin letters. The ministers in Pennsylvania found it difficult to write in Dutch, as many of them were unfamiliar with that language. So, after 1767 most of the coetus' reports to the deputies were written in Germau, although there were a few in German before. Frecpiently the deputies and the coetus would have misunderstandings, because they so imperfectly understood each other's lan- guage. 3. But more important than the last reason was a con- stitutional diU'ercnce on the right of ordination by the coe- SEPARATION PROM HOLLAND. 661 tus. This the deputies did not wish to grant, declaring tliat the applicants for the ministry in America could be examined, but not ordained until permission had first been gained from Holland. The deputies meant this for the good of the Church, so that no unworthy men might enter her ministry. They wanted to see that the funds they sent were used by proper men and for the true Reformed faith. Butthecoetus soon found this arrangement clumsy, and was compelled to ordain by force of circumstances. It therefore ventured to ordain Gros in 1765. The deputies severely found fault with them for this. But coetus in 1766 plead for the right to ordain, giving a few illustra- tions of the way in which independent ministers were tak- ing their congregations, because they had not the right to ordain. They also plead that as it was done in Schlatter's time, the same privilege be granted to them. The Hol- land synods replied, however, against ordination, saying that the example of Schlatter was no precedent, as there were only two or three ministers in Pennsylvania in his day, and besides Schlatter had first gained permission from Holland. The coetus then tried before ordaining to wait for permission. But in 1772, after waiting for a year to hear from Holland about Wack, Weber, Wagner, Steiuer and Nevelling, and getting no answer, they proceeded to ordain them without permission, as they thought they had waited long enough. They had ordained Weimer before without waiting, because of the great need of ministers on 662 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHTJRCH IN U. S. the borders. They ordained Schwob without permission, but explained that he lived in Maryland, which was in great want of ministers, and the deputies passed it over. They also ordained Gueting without permission, at which deputies were greatly surprised. So also in 1791, as after waiting a year and having not heard from the deputies about Rahauser and Stock, they ordained them. They also ordained Maun and Faber, Jr., in 1792, having passed an action in 1791 that they had the right to ordain with- out the permission of Holland, as the plan of waiting for the deputies had proved too cumbersome. 4. An educational difficulty. This was a long cause of diiference. As early as 1753 some of the members of the coetus, influenced by the charity school scheme, pledged themselves for some money toward an institution to train ministers if the deputies would grant permission. But the deputies declined to give such permission, as they said they had not the money to support it. The subject, how- ever, would not lie quiet, especially as the Dutch Reformed of New York had started an institution in New Jersey. But the deputies now liad another reason against it. They looked on it as the entering wedge toward the indepen- dence of the Pennsylvania Church, because the foundation of a theological professorship had led the Dutch of New York to separate from them. The matter, liowever, rested during the Revolution, the lack of a school having been made up for to some extent by the private education of SEPARATION PROM HOLLAND. 663 ministers by Hendel, Weyberg, Gros and others. But after the Revolution it came up again. Helffrich, in the coetal letter of 1785, requests a school with two teachers. The coctus of 1785 says that the project does not mean separation from Holland, as the deputies suspect, for that would be basest ingratitude after all the kindness Holland had shown them. Then occurred an event, which brought the subject into prominence, namely, the opening of the Franklin High School in 1787 at Lancaster, which the coetus attended in a body. This act fanned anew the suspicions of the Holland Church, which asked some very pointed (juestions about that school. The coetus became still more dissatisfied about the matter, especially as some of the last ministers sent from Holland had turned out so badly, particularly Pernisius and Willy. They felt that the men raised up in America were often better suited for their work than those sent from abroad. The Holland Church refused to the very last to grant permission for a school, and tliis was a large cause why the coetus became dissatisfied with their relations to Holland. While the coetus was becoming dissatisfied, signs of dissatisfaction with the Pennsylvania Church were begin- ning to show themselves in Holland in the synods and classes. They said they thought that the political changes that had taken place in the United States were putting a new spirit into the Church, leading toward independence. Some of the classes also think that from the way the coe- 664 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. tus writes, they, do not care to receive any more ministers from Holland, and so their well meant efforts were not appreciated. The refusal of the coetus to receive Pick was an element in causing the separation, although the deputies acquiesced in the decision of coetus. Some of the classes also declared that as the Reformed were able to build such large, fine churches as at Philadelphia and Falkner Swamp and Goshenhoppeu, the Church no longer was in need of foreign aid, but was able to be self-support- ing. Thus the two Churches were drifting apart. Matters finally came to a climax on two points, namely, the right of ordination and the sending of their minutes to Holland. Coetus in 171)1 took the following action : " That the coetus has the right at all times to examine and ordain those who offer themselves as candidates for the ministry, without asking or waiting for permission to do so from the fathers in Holland." The failure of the Holland fathers to send word about the ordination of Stock and llahauser was doubtless the cause of this action. That coetus also took action that " the coetus shall eacli time furnish the Reverend fathers with a report of the proceedings, accompanied with suit- able explanations when it is necessary." Strange to say, in the report of that coetus sent to Holland, these two articles are left out, so that the Hol- land Church was thus left in ignorance of them. In 1792 the coetus went farther, and declared : "A member of the Reverend coetus stated that it was SEPARATION FROM HOLLAND. 665 very desirable to have certain fixed rules introduced, which shall specifically define the way and manner of con- ducting the business of the coetus, as also the duties of each individual member thereof, etc., in order that this Reverend ministerial association may be united by closer bonds of sincere brotherly love." It was resolved to prepare fundamental rules of the nature spoken of, and Dominies Pomp and Blumer were appointed to attend to this duty and report at the next meeting of coetus. The coetus of 1793 completed the separation by the adoption of this constitution, which finally changed the coetus into a synod independent of Holland. The following is their action : " The church discipline which was prepared and sub- mitted to the coetus by Dominies Hendel and Blumer, was publicly read before the coetus, and each paragraph and article thoroughly investigated and various amendments made, after which it was approved and subscribed by the ministers and elders." So culminated the separation of our Church from the mother Church in Holland. CHAPTER VII.— SECTION V. THE HOLLAND DONATIONS. We come now to a very difficult subject, as the gifts of the Holland Church to our Pennsylvania Reformed extended over a long period of years ; and, besides, the records of the various Holland synods and classes do not always quite agree. A Dutch writer of considerable authority, Broes, states that the contributions from the Netherlands will not be computed too high were one to estimate them on the average of |1000 to $1200 a year for a period of sixty years. This would make their gifts to us $60,000 at least* We, however, find on examining the records that this amount is far too high. Still the amount was (piite considerable, when we remember that the value of money was much greater then than now. And besides the Dutch were giving this out of the purest charity, as tlusy were in no way responsible for the Ger- mans here, who were citizens of another kingdom, which ought to have cared for them. We have examined the accounts and find that the Holland churches gave : • The states of Holland and West Friesland gave $9200 in grants from 17.35 to 17fi3. THE HOLLAND DONATIONS. 667 Amounts sent over to the coctus, about $12,000 Amounts given for the traveling expenses of ministers, etc., about $8,000 Total amount given, $20,000 Amount invested in Holland in 1800, * $5,880 Total amount raised for Pennsylvania, $25,880 The history of the donations is quite interesting. The Dutch began giving, in 1730, to Weiss and Reiff, when Weiss reported $878.80. But although money kept flow- ing into the treasury for Pennsylvania, yet the action of Reitf in withholding the money collected and the lack of information from Pennsylvania prevented the Holland Church from sending any money over, except tliat the clas- sis of Amsterdam sent $102.60 to Boehm in 1740. They also gave Dorsius $36.80 for his trouble in gathering his report, and when in HoHand presented him with $10. They also spent $83.76 for Bibles for Pennsylvania. But outside of this they did nothing until they sent Schlatter. When he came to America in 1746, the Pennsylvania fund, which had been accumulating on their hands, amounted to $1120. The deputies gave him $242 when he left for America. Tiie deputies and classis also paid the traveling expenses of the four ministers who came over after liim. It was not, however, till 1752 that the Dutch open ■■ This was sold for $2S5 I. This fuml of the Pennsylvania churches re- mained in Holland and was used fur other religious objects. 668 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. their pocket books wide to aid Pennsylvania. Then, as the result of Schlatter's Appeal, money came pouring into the treasury. The deputies report $538 brought in that year. The classis of Amsterdam gave $240 and the dia- conate of Amsterdam $480. We have described elsewhere the successful effort to get their High Mightinesses, the states of Holland and West Frieslaud, to grant them money. A\'hen this grant ran out in 1756, the synods again asked the states (Novem- ber 30, 1756) to continue, as the needs of Pennsylvania were just as great as five years before, because the terrible Indian war had devastated the laud. And besides, the English people had been showing so much interest in them by raising money for the Charity Society, that the Dutch did not wish to be outdoue in liberality. As a result the states ordered a grant for three years more of $800 a year. The synods gained this through the kind assistance and influence of " the Great Estimables," the burgomasters of Amsterdam, whom the deputies afterward thanked for their eiforts. As the time began to approach when the grant would run out again, the classis of Am- sterdam, April 20, 1753, ordered an "Address of Thanks" to be prepared. This was printed in a booklet in 1758.* It described the needs of the work in Pennsylvania, and the use that had been made of the money sent by * A copy of this wms kindly given the author by Rev. I'rof. Van Veen, of the university of Utrecht. THE HOLLAND DONATIONS. 669 Holland. It had (|uitc an inflnence in gaining the next appropriation (November 29, 1759) of $600 for two years. The synods gained this appropriation on condition that they wonld not make another request for Pennsylvania. But when the two years had rolled by, they ventured to make one more recpiest, and they received (December 5, 1761) a grant of 1^400 a year for two years, provided they would not ask again. The states of Holland and West Friesland thus gave $8400, which, with the $800 given in 1735 to Goetschi, made $9200, which the secular authori- ties gave to found our Church in Pennsylvania. Meanwhile, as the time approached for these grants to run out, the deputies would urge the coetus in their letters to it to become more and more self-supporting. They did this the more, because one synod after another began giv- ing up taking collections for Pennsylvania, the synod of Friesland having ceased as early as 1757. The main bulk of the gifts were by the consistory and classis of Am- sterdam and the South and North Holland synods. The coetus grew weary of this continual prodding to greater self-support, and replied that it looks to them as if the hearts of the Holland Church were turning cold to them, because for several years the deputies had threatened to withdraw the gifts. This, however, was not true, for when the last grant ran out in 1763, the deputies bravely tried to raise sufficient money to carry on the work in Pennsylvania,, Tbey apportioned 1500 gulden among the 670 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. synods and the classis of Amsterdam. But these were not able to raise it all. As a result the gifts to Pennsylvania noticeably decrease, because they had no longer the state donations. Fortunately the Charity Society of England had aided two of the ministers, Muutz in 1755 and Alseutz in 1757, by paying their traveling expenses to America. The dei> uties then ask coetus to send money to Holland to pay the traveling expenses of ministers, as they no longer had the state donations. Money was sent to Holland by the Pennsylvania congregations to bring Hendel and Wey- berg over. But the coetus felt that this plan could not be carried on. Most of the congregations were too weak to send enough money to pay the traveling expenses. They therefore, in 1764, took the noble action of renoimc- ing all their share in the donations (which heretofore had been used to supplement their meagre salaries), in order that the money might all go to the traveling expenses of the new ministers, so that the congregations might be sup- plied with pastors. It seems, however, that the Holland deputies misunderstood their generous act and became suspicious that by thus refusing their gifts they no longer cared for them, and were inclined to become independent, as the New York ministers had become. Coetus, how- ever, explained matters, and a better understanding came between them. But the deputies found out that instead of sending their money to Pennsylvania and getting the THE HOLLAND DONATIONS. 671 Pennsylvania churches to send money for traveling expen- ses, that the opposite was the better way, namely to keep their money in Holland and use it for the traveling expenses of the ministers, and send over what was left. In 1766 the deputies send over the money, not, however, to supplement salaries, but for charity, as the widows' fund and the salaries of school-masters. This became the rule in the later years, the widows' fund, until finally all the Holland donations were given to the widows' fund. The last donation was not given to the Baltimore church, as has been supposed, but was ordered to be given to Rev. Mr. Nevelling, the invalid, as late as 1793. The coetus had (piite a difficult task to divide these donations from Holland, so as not to cause friction. To avoid this, they at first divided them equally among the ministers. But this soon developed a difficulty, for AVey- berg and one or two others who were receiving larger sala- ries than the others, yet received just as much from the donations as their poorer and more needy brethren. The coetus finally, in 1766, asked the deputies to make the division of the funds in Holland, which, however, they never seem to have done. Coetus therefore kept on dividing it e({ually. In course of time the difficulty in dividing it passed away, for Holland no longer sent enough to be divided among the ministers, but only for benevolence. Put better than the money sent by the Holland Churcl) 672 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. was their kindly interest that prompted them to give it. How patiently the Dutch Church bore with our controver- sies, and how carefully and wisely she decided them even at her distance. One would liave thought tliat she would long ago have wearied of her protege in Pennsylvania, but she did not. She was always waiting with interest for let- ters from Pennsylvania, or writing letters to Germany or Switzerland, seeking for ministers to go to Pennsylvania. The consistory of Amsterdam is to be especially commended for their liberality, as they gave about three-fifths of all that was given. That classis and consistory of Amsterdam gave about $180 a year for many years, even as late as 1794 (two years after our Church had separated from Hol- land), appropriating $169.20. The synods of North and South Holland also gave liberally. For these large gifts and this long continued interest and supervision our Church in the United States owes a constant debt of gratitude to the Reformed Church of the Netherlands. Their disinterested kindness should always be remembered by us. We owe our present strength to the aid given by Holland to us in our weakness. Other parts of America applied to Holland for aid, as South Car- olina and Nova Scotia, but were refused because the Dutch had no money. As a result there is no Reformed Church there to-day. Such to a large extent would have been the result in Pennsylvania if the Hollanders had withheld tl»eir generosity. Our General Synod, feeling this debt THE HOLLAND DONATIONS. 673 wheu it celebrated its ceutennial in 1893, sent a vote of thanks to the General Synod of the Reformed Church of Holland for their kindness in the last century. Our prayer should be that this mother Church of ours might be greatly prospered, and that the blessings she sent to us miffht come back to her in richer measure. 43 CHAPTER yil.— SECTION VI. SUMMARY OF THE COETUS. A.— Doctrine. The Church during the period of the coetus was evi- dently strongly Calvinistic and predestinariau. The matrix in which our Church was born was Calvinism. Melancthonianism was not thought of under the Dutcli control. For sixty-four years (long enough to mould a . Church for all its future) the Church was distinctly Cal- vinistic. This fact is shown by the following reasons : 1. The Name. — She was called the German Calvinistic Church. This is true in the correspondence with Holland, In many of the title deeds to her properties she is called the German Calvinistic Church. She was known by that name among the other denominations, and was so addressed by Presbyterians and Episcopalians. Of the German churches, over against the Lutheran she was the German Calvinist. She was Calvinist among the Germans as the Presbyterians were among the English. 2. The Creeds. — The first creed' she adopted was the Heidelberg Catechism and the Canons of Dort, the latter especially committing her to a strict predestinariau posi- SUMMARY OF THE COETUS. 675 tioD,* although we believe that Calvinism is also tlie his- toric iuterpretatiou of the Heidelberg Catechism. At the coetus of 1752 she reaffirmed her adherence to the C^anous of Dort and the Heidelberg Catechism, as all the minis- ters, even Rieger, subscribed to them. The coetus of 1765 also refers to the Canons of Dort as the creed of the Church. Even down to the end they adhere to it. An interesting episode occurred in connection with the ordi- nation of Hautz in 1783. The coetus, without waiting for the consent of Holland, ordained him, but made him sign an oath of agreement " with the doctrines, usages and regulations of the Biblical Reformed Church." For this they were taken to task by the deputies, because this oath did not specifically mention the Holland creeds. They replied, however, that they had not the slightest idea of weakening from the Holland standards, and that the oath of Hautz was intended for the opposite purpose, namely to stiffen their adherence over against certain forms of liberal thought that were coming in. Nowhere in all its history is there any renunciation of these creeds by the eoetus, but, on the contrary, there was a firm adherence to them. 3. The Oaths of the Ministers. — All the ministers sent over from Holland were required to give adherence to these Dutch creeds, and this was true of those received by the coetus in America, who, before they would be approved * Seejpages 105 and 353. 676 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. by the deputies, must approve the Dutch creeds. Indeed, those who went from Holland not only signed the Canons ofDortaud Heidelberg Confession, but all three of the Dutch creeds, as they are said to have signed the " for- mula of unity,^' which meant the Belgic confession, together with the other two. Thus the oath of the early ministers reveals this : " We, the undersigned, acknowledge by this subscrip- tion that we hold ourselves, with heart and mouth, to all those formulas whose maintenance the preachers of the coetus of Pennsylvania under the Netherlaud synods shall help to secure." This was signed by the six ministers who came over with Schlatter in 1752. The full calls of two of the min- isters are still extant — one given near the beginning and the other near the end of the coetus. The first is of Al- sentz in 1757 and the second of Pernisius in 1784. Both subscribed to the Netherlands' symbols and the Canons of Dort, and as these calls were signed so ftir apart, their form of subscription was probably used by all. 4. The Publications. — Thus Stapel published Lampe's " Milk of Truth," which revealed his adherence to the Lampean school of Calvinistic theology, in which he had been trained at Herborn. And he says that this book was approved by the coetus, which would thus commit coetus to its views. Again Pomp is attacked by Alex- ander Mack, the Dunkard, in an unpublished work, for SUMMARY OF THE COETUS. 677 the doctrine of the decrees taught in his book against the Everlasting Gospeh 5. Individual Ministers. — These, by their correspon- dence and works, speak of their adherence to Calvinism. One of the most significant episodes was the controversy of Pomp and Otterbein in Baltimore in 1788. Pomp attacked Otterbein with not being Reformed, because he did not believe in predestination. Otterbein wrote to Holland, defending himself against this, so that the Hol- land fathers would not cast him out. He assured them that he still held to predestination, but not to the double predestination. Thus both Pomp and Otterbein claim to be predestinarian, the former a high Calvinist and the latter a low Calvinist. Helffrich was a predestinarian, as was shown by his unpublished Latin dogmatics.* Rev. Samuel Helffeusteiu in his Theology says that its views (which are predestinarian) were those held by the Re- formed fathers in this country from the beginning. And Herman evidently was a predestinarian, for he accepted this doctrine when he signed the oath before deputies to come to America. Predestinarianism was not forced on the ministers, as has been charged, but they accepted it willingly, " with heart and voice." All these things reveal the dogmatic position of our * This work was kindly loaned to the author by Rev. Nov in W, Helffrich, whose father's valuable transcripts of coetus' minutes and correspondence was presented to Ursinus College by another son, Rev. William U. Helffrich. 678 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. early Church. Whatever may have been the later departures from Calvinism, the Church was cradled in Calvinism, and she held it during the period of the coetus. It was not until Ranch, Nevin and Schaif brought into her the Mediating theology of Germany, that there were any very serious departures from the Calvinism that was the common belief of the early Church. The Church, from 1725 to 1850, was essentially Calvinistic and Zwinglian. B.— Worship. The early Church was non-liturgical. It used a free service in the regular Sabbath worship, although it used forms for special occasions, as the sacraments, marriage and ordination. This is proved by the following reasons : 1. In the coetus' acts there is no liturgy mentioned as having been used in connection with the worship at the coetus' meetings. It is nowhere said that the ministers opened with the liturgical forms "for the opening of synod." But, on the contrary, they are said to have been opened with a " fervent prayer," " an earnest prayer," which phrases would have been meaningless if the same old forms were used every time. These adjectives refer to the matter and manner of the prayer as being different every time. 2. Wherever in the Holland correspondence a liturgy is mentioned, the forms mentioned as used are those connect- ed with the extraordinary services, as sacraments, mar- riage and ordinations, and not with the ordinary Sunday SUMMARY OF THE COETUS. 679 services. Thus Boehm objects to the union with the Pres- byterians, because he would be compelled to give up his use of a liturgy on sacramental and extraordinary occa- sions. But he does not speak of differing from the Pres- byterians in the regular Sunday service, which among the Presbyterians was free. Again, when Boehm speaks of a divergence existing between Schlatter's and his customs in the Philadelphia congregation, when Schlatter introduced the St. Gall liturgy, he speaks of its use only for sacra- ments, and marriages and ordinations. 3. The oath of the ministers required the use only for sacramental occasions. Thus the deputies in 1761 require of Weyberg the use of the formula for baptism and the Lord's Supper, but nothing more. 4. If responsive liturgical services had been common, then there must have been a number of liturgies published during this period for the use of the congregations, so that the members might know when to come in with the responses, etc. But no liturgy was published during the entire period of the coetus, showing a carelessness of the churches in regard to this matter. The reason was that the Reformed did not use such a liturgy. It is said by Rev. Dr. Samuel Helifenstein that a liturgy was published in 1 794, (after the close of the coetus.) We have seen a copy of this and it is the simplest we have ever seen. It has no forms for Sabbath services, only for ordination, baptism, confirmation, Lord's Supper and marriage. 680 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. 5. The only liturgical formula that coiild have been used officially was the Netherlands, and the fathers say they used the Palatinate. But none of these have responses or broken up prayers for responses. They are very simple. 6. Although the Mayer liturgy, published in 1841, and adopted by the Church, does not belong to this period, yet it gave a good idea of the custom of the early Reformed fathers in worship. It contains no services for the regu- lar Sabbath services, only for extra occasions, as sacra- ments, etc., revealing that the old custom of the Church was a free service at the regular worship. The Church Year. The old Reformed custom, according to the Palatinate liturgy, was to observe the five great festivals of the church year which were founded on the Bible — Christmas, Good Friday, Easter, Ascension and Whitsunday. It cast aside the rest of the fictions and falsehoods of the church year. Our church records, therefore, refer to the Biblical feasts. But although Schlatter held the first coe- tus on St. Michael's Day, the cootus soon cast that aside, and met regardless of such extra days of the cliurch year. It however dated itself in reference to Ascension or Whit- Sunday, as tliey were Biblical feasts. Altar. There is no mention of the altar as a piece of church furniture, for the Reformed name was communion table. Thi,* is shown : SUMMARY OF THE COETUS. 681 1. The liturgies in use, as the Netherlands, or Palati- nate (or even Basle, if the latter were used) have no room for any altar service or mention an altar. They all speak of a " table." 2. The Heidelberg Catechism speaks of a table in question 81. The English translation has changed this question, but the German (which was the original language of the catechism) which was in use in the days of the coe- tus, reads thus : " Who are to come to the Table of tiie Lord." 3. Schlatter speaks of it as a communion table. Thus on May 15, 1747, he says in his diary : " I preached at Fredericktown in a new church, which is not yet finished, standing behind a table, upon which had been placed the holy covenant seals of baptism and the Lord's Supper," 4. In union churches (that is those that were Lutheran and Reformed) the communion table may have been called by the Lutherans an altar, for the altar is a part of their service. But the Reformed could not have used it as such, because their liturgies and creeds had no room for an altar. But even the Lutherans did not cherish any pecu- liar sanctity for the altar, for these altars (if we may use the Lutheran term) were only chancel-closets used for any secular purpose. Tims hymn books. Bibles, and even lost handkerchiefs and gloves, were kept in them, yes, even dust rags and brushes. There was no such sanctity about them as is given now to the altar, in which no closet 682 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. is allowed or secularity permitted. These modern altars were unknown to our fathers. It was not until the con- troversy began in the Church about 1860 that altars — high altars — began to be spoken of and introduced. They would be a novelty to our fathers of the coetus. Hymn Books. No hymn book was published by the coetus, although the Marburg hymn book was used. This had in it some Lutheran elements, because intended in this country for Lutherans as well as Reformed. And when the synod published its first hymn book in 1797, it left these out. C— Constitution. The first church constitution was that of Bcehm, adopted first by his own congregation and afterward by the coetus in 1748. The Holland fathers, however, made the Netherland church constitution the constitution of the Church. The coetus again and again expressed its attach- ment to the Netherland Church constitution, as in 1765 and 1768. Into the details of the church government we have not time to enter. It would be interesting to discuss the brief controversies that deputies had with the classis of Amster- dam, as in 1757, about the right of ordination, in 1772 about traveling expenses, and finally after 1793 about the disposal of the Pennsylvania funds. But we have not time. With these exceptions the Holland synod, for SUMMARY OP THE CUETUS. 683 such a complex organization, worked quite harmoniously together in their Pennsylvania work. Nor can we enter at length into the various constitu- tional points that came up in the history of the coetus here. We would note only the following : 1. The Membership of the Coetus, — The composition of the coetus was at first not quite clear. Quite a num- ber of the congregations remained av/ay from the coetus of 1748, as they had no pastors. But soon they found that a pastorless congregation was still a member of the coe- tus. When Schlatter, who had been compelled to leave Philadelphia, was elected president of the coetus, Rubel brought up the point that a minister without a charge was not a member of the coetus, but the coetus decided for Schlatter and against Rubel, thus making a minister without a charge a member. The only condition of mem- bership for either ministers or congregations was adher- ence to the Holland creeds, and submission to the Holland Church and the coetus. In 1753 came the controversy whether elders were members of coetus. But the Hol- land fathers decided against Schlatter here, saying that they were, although the elders for some time were not allowed to have a vote in the distribution of the Holland donations, but finally this right was granted to them too. The coetus "-radnallv defined the rights of members more and more, although in oases of discipline it had gradually to learn how to proceed in a regular manner. 684 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IK U. S. 2. The Relations of the Coetus to the Congregation. — a. The Pastoral Relation. Here appeared almost at the very beginning a controversy. The Philadelphia congre- gation claimed the right to call and dismiss a pastor at will. Schlatter claimed this was not right, as the coetus must approve and dissolve pastoral relationships. Coetus decided for Schlatter. Some of the congregations also claimed the right to engage a minister for a specified term of years or by the year. This prevented them from being entirely subject to coetus on this point. But the Holland Church was very severe against this custom, giving the coetus no rest until this was done away with. Later coetus gave greater liberty to the congregations. It allowed them to call a minister without waiting for a meeting of the coetus. Thus the coetus of 1782 says it had given this power to the congregations and would keep it up. Often congregations and ministers could not wait for coetus' meeting, as they were held so seldom. h. Visitation. As the Holland fathers insisted on a visitation of the churches, Schlatter had at first occupied virtually the position of visitor up to 1755. Coetus in 1759 appointed Leydich, in 1760 Otterbein and Stoy. In 1763 it decided that, owing to the scarcity of ministers and increase of their labors, this could not be attempted that year. They told the Holland fathers in 1764 that they had no wish to give it up, and would try to have it done in the summer. In 1764 and 1765 Weyberg and Alsentz SUMMAEY OF THE COETUS. 685 acted as visitors. But coetus had to give it up. There were too few miuisters and the distances were too great. The visitor, however, was not of any higher rank than other ministers, for the Weiss party settled the question of the parity of the ministry in the coetus. 3. The Relations of the Coetus to the Upper Court, namely, the Holland Deputies and Classis of Amsterdam. — There was no controversy here about the right of appeal to Holland, which was frequently used, both by the coetus and the ministers. We have already noted quite a differ- ence between them, namely, on the right of ordination, which the Holland Church was loth to give, and the coetus claimed it in special cases. The Holland fathers also in 1758 asked for statistics, such as they received from other Churches which they supported. The .coetus found this difficult, and its failure to give statistics caused dissatis- faction in the Holland synods in 1759. But by 1760 coetus sent the statistics of the churches over, and they keep it up after that, although the deputies sometimes find fault with these for being imperfect, and especially with some of the ministers, who did not make any report at all, even when present at coetus. Still the statistics are com- paratively full and very important. The coetus kept up a regular correspondence with Holland, sending its coetus' minutes, accompanied with a coetal letter, every year. Sometimes these would go astray or be long belated. The deputies and classis also both kept up a regular correspon- dence with the coetus. 686 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. Summing it up, the constitution of the coetus was a democratic Calvinism, not aristocratic. Schlatter had tried to introduce the latter, but failed, as Weiss (who rep- resented the autonomy of the congregations), and his party prevailed. Coetus, therefore, allowed congregations a large amount of power. The congregation was the norm of church government, not the coetus (or classis). The congregations came first, and they it was who formed the coetus. The coetus did not first form the congregations. Each congregation retained for itself tiie right it had not given the coetus. Thus centralization of power was un- known, but the greater liberty allowed the congregations produced spontaneity of effort on their part, which Cal- vinistic aristocracy and centralization of power, regardless of the rights of the congregation, crushes out. Its govern- ment, in a word, was democratic Calvinism, the individu- ality of the congregation being preserved and guarded in connection with the authority of the Church. APPENDIX. I. THE FIRST GERMAN REFORMED CONGREGATION IN AMERICA. Virginia seems to have the hoDor of having the first German Reformed congregation. Since Rev. John F. Haeger, who went to New York state, can be dismissed from notice, as he was an Episcopalian, not Reformed, it now appears, according to Rev. Professor Hinke, that Haeger's father, who went to Virginia, held the first Re- formed service. John Henry Haeger was born in 1644 at Antshausen in Nassau, Germany, and became (Sep- tember 25, 1678) teacher of the third class in the Latin school at Siegen. In 1703 he became pastor at Fisch- bach. In 1711 he resigned at Fischbach. He was in London, October 2, 1713, when he asked the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel to aid him, but was refused. In 1714 he went, together with twelve Protest- ant families, to Virginia by the invitation of Governor Spotswood, who wanted miners. (Siegen was surrounded by mines.) They settled at what is now known as Ger- mania Ford on the Rapidan. The following is a very 688 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. interesting description of the first German Reformed wor- ship as given by a Frencli traveler who passed through their district on November 20 and 21, 1715 : "About 5 P. M. we crossed the bridge that was made by the Germans, and about 6 we arrived at the German settlement. We immediately went to the minister's house. We found nothing to eat, but lived upon our small pro- vision and lay upon some good straw. Our beds not being very easy, as soon as it was day we got up. It rained hard. Notwithstanding we walked about the town, which is palisaded with stakes struck in the ground and laid close to the other, and of substance to bear out a musket shot. There are but nine families, and they have nine houses built all in a line ; and before every house, about twenty feet distant from it, they have small sheds built for their hogs and hens, so that hogstys and houses make a street. The place that is paled is a pentagon very regularly laid out, and in the very centre there is a block- house made with five sides, which answer to the five sides of the enclosure. There are loopholes through it, from which you may see all the inside of the enclosure. This was intended for a retreat for the people in case they were not able to defend the palisades if attacked by Indians. They make use of this blockhouse for divine service. They go to prayers constantly once a day, and have two sermons on Sunday. We went to hear them perform their service, which was done in their own language, APPENDIX. 689 which we did not uuderstand, but they seemed to be very devout and sang the Psalms very well." This is the first mention of a Geraian Reformed ser- vice in America, and it was held in the fort. This con- gregation sent one of the settlers, J. C Zollikofcr, to Eu- rope in 1719 to get a new minister, as Haeger was getting old. He, in a paper of Frankford, Germany, of June 15, 1720, made an appeal for aid. These Germans remained at Germanna until before 1724, when, having become dis- satisfied with the governor, who refused to give them titles to land there, they left and went northwest to German- town (now Weaversville, Va.) Haeger seems to have lived until 1737 (when his will is probated, March 28, 1737), dying at the great age of ninety-three years. 44 690 THE GEEMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. 8. n. MEETINGS OF THE PENNSYLVANIA COETUS. Kind of Year. Month and Day, Meeting. » Place. President. Secretary, 1747 Sept. 29-Oct. 2. Philadelphia. Schlatter. Boehm. 1748 September 28-30 >i Bwhm. Rieger. 1749 September 27. Quasi Meeting Lancaster. Rieger. Weiss. " October 20-24. Philadelphia. " It 1750 November 16. « Weiss. Leydich. " December l.S. Special. « >< >( 1751 September 12. (?) Leydich (?) Lischy (?) 1752 August 10-13. Special. Philadelphia. " October 18-23. Lancaster. Schlatter. Stoy. " December 12. Special. Philadelphia. " " 1753 April 26-27. Special. Lancaster. " Rieger. " September 10. Quasi Meeting , Goshenhoppen, . Weiss. " October 9-10. Lancaster. Rieger. Otterbein. " October 10-12. Rival Coetus. Cocalico. Weiss. Leydich. 1754 October 30-31. Conven tion. ' Philadelphia. 1755 April 9-11. . Lancaster. Weiss. Rieger. " October. Special. (?) « n 1756 June 15-17. Philadelphia. Rieger. Leydich. 1757 June 8-9. Lancaster. Otterbein. Steiner. " August 24. Special. Philadelphia. Leydich. « 1758 September lt>. i< Steiner. Waldschmidt. 1769 October 9. Goshenhoppen, , Waldschmidt. AlsentE. 1760 May 28. Special. Falkner Swamp Leydich. 11 » October 21-22. Germantown. Alsentz. DuBois. 1761 June 24-25. Lancaster. >( " 1762 June 30-July 1. New Hanover. DuBois. Stapel. 1763 May 5-6. Qermantown. Stapel. Alsentz. " October 24. Special. Philadelphia. (t i< 1764 May 2-3. « Alsentz. Weyberg. " September 12. Special. (?) « « * When a regular meeting is meant, no mention is made in the column. APPENDIX. 691 MEETINGS OF THE PENNSYLVANIA COETUS.— Continued. Kind 0, f Year. Month and Day. Meeting r. Place. President. Secretary. 1765 May 8-9. Lancaster. Weyberg. Alsentz. " October 16 17. Special. Philadelphia. >< it 1766 September 3-4. Reading. Otterbein. Hendel. 1767 September 16-17. Lancaster. DuBois. It 1768 September 7-9. Easton. Hendel. Gros. 1769 September 20-21. Germantown. Gros. Pomp. 1770 September 19-21. Philadelphia. Pomp. Henop. 1771 October 9-10. Reading. Henop. Faber. 1772 June 17-18. Lancaster. Faber. Boehme. 1773 October 27-28. li Boehme. Blumer. 1774 May 2-3. Philadelphia. Blumer. Dallicker. 1775 May 10-11. Lebanon. Dallicker. Bucher. 1776 May 1. Lancaster. Gobrecht. Helffrich. 1777 April 28-29. Reading. HelfiFrioh. Witner. 1778 May 13. (?) Quasi Meeting , Lancaster. 1779 April 28-29. « Hendel. Helffenstein . 1780 No Meeting 1781 May 9-10. Philadelphia. Helffen stein. Weyberg. 1782 May 2. Reading. Weyberg. Pomp. 1783 May 14-15. Philadelphia. Pomp. Dallicker. 1784 May 12-13. Lancaster. Henop. Blumer. 1785 April 27-28. Reading. Blumer. Helffrich. 1786 May 17-18. Philadelphia. HelfiFrich. Dallicker. 1787 June 5-7. Lancaster. Dallicker. Helffenstein, 1788 April 23-24. Reading. Helffenstein. Dallicker. 1789 June 10-11. Philadelphia. Hendel. <( 1790 June 7-8. FalknerSwam p Dallicker. Pomp. 1791 June 27-28. Lancaster. Hendel. Wagner. 1792 May 6-7. Philadelphia. Wagner. Wynckhaus. 692 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. III. ANDREW LORETZ. Just as the last form of this book was going to press, we received the Autograph Book of Andrew Loretz from Mr. A. C. Link, of Hickory, N. C. It shows that there were two persons named Andrew Loretz, and that the younger was at Kaufbeuren, Bavaria, from May G, 1779, to June 7, 1783. He was in Chiavenna, Italy, May 8, 1784, and in Chur, August 28 to September 10, 1784. His Certificate of Citizenship and Health from the city of Chur is dated Se])tember 8, 1784, when he must have left for America, probably to follow his father. On June 12, 1786, he was at Myerstown, Pa., where John Reily wrote in his autograph book. From there he went to North Carolina. ERRATA. Page 144, Henry Haeger should be John Henry Haeger. Page 262, Toberbihler should be Toberbiller. Page 495, " soldier" should be " champion." Page 590, John Peter Miller should be Peter Miller. Page 591, the end of paragraph on Hertzel should be " 1785-1795," instead of 1780. Page 613, Faremer should be Farmer. Page 640, 1809 should be 1819. INDEX OF NAMES, PLACES, &c. Al)l)()ttstown, 567. Alhauy, Pa., 569. Alexaudria, 553. Allemangel, 236, 590. Alsace, Pa., 571. Alsentz, 458, 538, 540-542, 567, 569, 676. Amwell, 167, 345, 359, 391, 434, 522, 532, 542, 543, 553, 571, 586. Andrews, 104, 117, 161, 183, 475. Baird's, 569. Baltimore, 503, 549, 555, 564, 567, 569, 576, 589, 595, 597- 601, 631, 632, 650-658. Bartliolomaeus, 350, 352, 357, 361, 384, 392, 393, 490- 492. Beaver Dam, 595. Bcchtel, 185, 204-220, 211, 213, 238, 241. Beeker, 647, 657. Bedford, 566, 645, Beissel, 119, 162, Beri-er, 582. Berlin, Pa., 645, 648. Bermudian, 567. Bern Church, Pa., 172, 184, 240, 329, 573. Antes, Henry, 104, 129, 201- 203,207,214,218-219,231, 237, 241, 449. Antes, F., 613. Autietam, 593, 637. Antonides, 64, 125, 167, 273. Appeal, Schlatter's, 395, 404, 668. Apple's, 569. Arnoldi, 300, 401, 404, 498. Avery, 440. B Besore's, 569. Bethany, 640. Blaser's, 646. Blue Mountain, 240, 337. Blumer, 555, 571, 616, 639, 641. Badim, 66, 88, 89-107, 121- 133, 135, 160, 185-189, 193-196, 213, 224-232, 264- 278, 289-290, 291, 311, 317, 318, 320, 324, 332, 334, 342, 363, 463, 466, 478-481, 667. Bcehm's Church (see Witj)en), 628. Bcvhme, 554. Boel, 125, 130, 167. Bohler, 201. 694 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. Boos, 588, 644. Bouquet, 469, 526-530. BoutoD, 336, 354, 382. Bowmau, 119. Boyd, 162. Braudmiller, 236. Cacusi (see Hain's or Heidel- berg Church, Berks Co.), 184, 240, 329, 512, 520, 589, 616. Calvin, 4, 331, 355. Calvinism. See Predestina- tion, 105, 404, 430, 674. Camp, 432. Canogocheaque, 569, 645. Carlisle, 566, 626, 636. Carolina (see North Caroli- na), 52-61, 171, 258. Catawba, -^87. Catskill, 149. Chambersburg, 569, 640. Chandler, 438-459, 541, 543, 586. Charitv Schools and Society, 435-459, 541, 542, 586, 670. Chitara, 637. Christ's Church, 567. Delaware, 29-30, 62-64. Dallickcr, 553, 560, 571, 642. Davies, 431, 446. Decker, 520. Detweiler, 471. Dieraer, 158, 266, 285, 449. Dillenberger, 649. Donations, 291, 665. Donegal, 111,235, 236, 240, 242, 329, 363. DeWees, 65, 66, 105, 127, 269. C Brazil, 3. Brigg's, 473, 484. Brownback's, 642. Brunholz, 384. Bucher, 565, 625. Burnetsfield, 150. Cobb, 32, 38. Cocalico, 110, 240, 329, 341, 421, 424, 533, 636. Coligny, 3, 17, 18. Comingoe, 587. Conestoga, 106, 120-121,273, 336. Conewago, 267, 327, 340, 346, 348, 594-595. Congregation of God in the Spirit. See Moravian. Cort, 530. Corwin, 434. Corpus Evangelicorum, 263. Coventry, 235, 239, 495. See Vincent and Schuylkill. Cross, 475, 480. Cruciger, 91, 94, 95, 299, 300, 301. Curtenius, 328. D Dorsins, 158, 188, 190-199, 234, 270-274, 290-2!) 1 , 296. 318, 473-478. Dort, Canons of, 105, 167, 306, 353, 355, 407, 414, 415, 430, 674, 676. Dotterer, 369, 494. Dryland, 587, 646. Drury, 498, 501, 652. DuBois, Gualther, 64, 125, 130, 167, 311, 425, 482, 485, 491. INDEX OF NAMES, PLACES, &C. ^96 DuBois, Jonathan, 192, 362, 416, 419, 429, 430, 513- 515,526,538,568,581. Dubbs, 508, 593, 596. Dubendorf, 606, 644. Easton, 451, 545, 550, 562, 587, 632. East Camp. See Camp, 45. Ebenezer, 262, 518, 525,590- 591. Faber. J. C, 575, 596. Faber, J. T., 551, 568, 582. Faber, J. T., Jr., 640, 662. Falkner Swamp, 104, 125, 229, 320, 325, 336, 350, 357, 392, 425, 466, 494, 548, 574, 610. Falling Spring, 559. Farmer, 613,616. Fluck, 610. Foxhill, 345, 359, 553, 571. Frankford, 632, 639. Dunkards, 109, 162, 200, 207- 208, 211, 289. DuFert, 649. Dylander, 204, 212. E F G Gasser, 585. Gebhard, 561. Geneva, 4, 69-70. Gerhart, 656, 657. Gerraantown, 66, 87, 107, 160, 167, 205, 214, 217, 220-224, 232-233, 259, 314, 323, 326, 336, 349, 385, 425, 497, 541-542, 559, 560, 568, 571, 576, 619, 628, 632. Germautown, Va., 595. German Valley. See Am- well, 571. Eckert, 613, 616. Egypt, 184, 254, 273, 329, 337, 367, 504, 556. Emmittsburg, 628. Erlentown, 556. Franklin, 212, 446, 453. Frankenfeld, 406, 411, 416, 421-434, 504. Frederick, Md., 346, 497, 501, 504, 525, 550, 574, 584, 595, 627, 681. Frederick, Rev., 649. Frelinghuvsen, 66, 125, 188, 208, 273-274, 290, 328. Fresenius, 214, 229, 403. Freymuth, 126, 196. Funkstown, 595. Gettysburg, 628, 632. Giese, 647. Glade, 628. Gloninger, 613. Gobrecht, 567, 598, 611. Goetscbi, 107, 171-189, 267. Goshenhoppen, 107, 121, 183, 184, 235, 240, 253, 314, 321, 336, 516, 521, 549, 551, 554, 562, 640, 646. Graftenreid, 52-61. Great Swamp, 183, 184, 336, 520, 551, 567, 570. Greencastle, 669. 696 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IX U. S. Greeuwieh, 569. Guetiiig, 596, 637, 662. Griudstone Hill, 569, 645. Guilford, 264, 587, 612. Gros, 563, 571, 573, 598, 616, Guldin, 68-88, 207-224, 314. 633, 661, 663. H Haeger, J. F., 144-147, 687. Heiner, 590. Haeger, J. H., 61, 687. Ap- Heltfenstein, 472, 556, 559, pendix I. 611,625,677,679. Hagerstowu, 590, 595, 639. Helfincli, 526, 557, 639, 640, Hall Mill, 323, 462. 641, 642. Hanover (see McCallister's), Hendel, 5-16, 547, 570, 573, 554, 567. 582, 593, 594, 599, 611, Harbaugh, 313, 380, 460, 625, 626, 636, 637, 639, 471-472,495,508,567,571, 640, 642, 647, 653, 657, 575, 576, 589, 643, 644. 663. Harrisburg, 636. Henop, 549, 569, 570, 594, 647. Hautz, 636, 675. Hensepeter, 406-407. Hecker, 520. Herlzel, 591. Heidelberg Catechism, 14, 26, Hiester, 336, 613. 86, 105, 213, 306, 353, 406, Hillegass, 114, 120, 124, 266, 414-415, 438, 483, 657. 382. Heidelberg Consistory, 114, Hinke, 603, 646, Preface, Ap- 116, 135, 279. pendix I. Heidelberg Congregation, in Herman, 631. Berks Co. (see Cacusi), 451. Hoclireiitiner, 350, 352, 357, Heidelberg Congregation, in 360, 492. Lebanon county, 235, 240, Hock, 256. 242, 566. Host, 507, 508. Heidelberg Congregation, in Hottinger, 292, 299, 355. Lehigh county, 569, 590, Hummelstown, 566, 626. 591, 674. I Indians, 3, 13, 27, 396. 552, 562, 567, 570, 638, 648. Indian Creek (Indian Field), Ingold, 5(51. 253, 322, 336, 521, 549, Inspector, 273. J Jablonsky, 203, 218, 230. Jordan, 556. Jacobs, 45, 518, 590, 591. INDEX OF NAMES, PLACES, &C. 697 Kals, 458, 532, 585. Kelpius, 82. Keru, 607, 648. Kestenberg, 551. Kideuweiler, 519. K Kichlein, 618. Kissel's Farm, 239. Kreutz Creek, 235, 242. Kutztown, 591. Lampe, 298, 404-405, 544, 592, 676. Lancaster, 167, 242, 247, 251, 256, 316, 327, 346, 349, 360. 361, 375, 377, 385, 415, 422, 451, 462, 499, 507, 546, 552, 554, 559, 570, 611. Lange, 596, 657. Lapp, 521. Lebanon, 566, 613, 627, 631, 646. Leesburg, 648. Lehigh, 329, 525, 575, 642. Lehigh, Little, 337, 520, 591. Leydich, 351, 352, 359, 371, 372, 376, 384, 392, 409, 410, 413-435, 493-496, 526, 575, 611, 684, 685. Mack, 676. Magunschy, 329, 367. Mahantango, 645. Manatawny, 330. Manchester, 5i)5. Manheim, 627, 646. Mann, 641. Manor, 628. Marin us, 196, 362. Martin, 649. Maytown, 64(5. Matthai, 207. Leydt, 487. Lischy, 231, 237-246, 326, 327, 329, 341, 344, 346, 348, 357, 361-363, 369, 371, 374, 383, 392, 409- 410, 414, 416. Liturgy, 466,678. London, 38-40,48,54, 55, 58. Lougswanip, 517, 518, 520, 591. Loretz, 630, 648, Appendix IIL Lovettsville, 550, 648. Lower Settlement, 626. Lowhill, 518, 569. Lunenberg, 469. Lupp, 646. Lynn, 525, 569, 590. M Maxatawny, 184, 329, 519, 558. Mayer, 680. Maytown, 627. McHenry, 475, 476. Megapolensis, 29. Menuonites, 200, 207. Michael, 517, 590, 614, 645. Michael's Church, 329, 519. Middle Creek, 645. JNliddletown, 566, 628. Mieg, 116. 698 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. Milford, Upper, 495, 521, 551, 575. Miller, Frederick Casimir, 314,321,323,424,516. Miller, John Peter, 109, 160- 165. Miller, Peter, 590. Minuit, 26-30, 68. Mohawk, 49. Monocacy, 327, 340, 346, 347. Moravians, 168, 200-240, 349. Moselem, 184. Mount Bethel, 641. Mount Pleasant, 474. Muddy Creek, 110, 235, 239, 240, 241, 244, 329, 341, 363, 511, 550, 567, 636. Muhlbach, 235. Muhlenberg, 189, 259, 260, 384, 410, 429, 447, 448, 469, 471-472, 495, 534,554, 586. Muntz, 458,531. Mursinna, 638, 657. N Nacomixon, 571. Nevelling, 572, 612, 661,670. New Berne, 56, 58. New Born, 119, 200, 603. New Castle, Del., 62, 81. New Gerinantown, 347. New Hanover, 450. New Holland, 640. See Zel- tenreich. New Providence, 450, 451. See Trappe. New York, 27, 31-51, 127- 132, 328, 332. North Carolina, 264, 587, 617, 649. North and South Hampton, 65. Nolton, 638. 0 Oehl, 147, 148. Oley, 88, 107, 118, 184, 200, 209, 210, 214, 229, 235, 315,350,392,516,517,589. Otterbein, 406, 411, 416, 422, 449, 495, 497-503, 526, 538, 582, 584, 593, 594, 596, 599- 601,625,651-658,677,684. Palatinate, 31, 32-40, 98-99, 402. Pauli, 638, 647. Peun, 27, 29, 64, 101, 449. Pernisius, 641. Philadelphia, 81, 82, 88, 107, 114, 121, 160, 161, 182, 229,265-266,313,324,326, 328, 334, 336, 345, 349, 357,374,376-390,392,410, 412-434,466,497,503,506, 531,545,608-610,619,635. Pick, 633, 664. Pietism, 592-596, 618. Pilesgrove, 326. Pipe Creek, 594. Pitt, Fort (Pittsburg), 566, 574. Plainfield, 574. Planta, 555, 585. INDEX OF NAMES, PLACES, &C. 699 Pomp, 548-549, 568, 570, 582, 596, 600, 636, 640, 655, 665, 676. Pottstown, 613, 632, 642. Presbyterians, 161, 183, 255, 263, 288, 419, 429, 456, 473-489. Quitopahilla, 110, 235, 566. Rahauser, 639, 663. Ranch, 209-21 1 , 234-236,241 . Reading, 450, 562, 571, 582, 589, 613, 639, 642. Reichel, 243, 244. Reiff; 115, 124, 134-143, 153- 169, 268, 290, 311, 314, 317, 373, 379, 387, 424, 428. Reiss, 521. Revolution, 164, 469, 618- 629. Reyers, 550, 636. Rieger, 162, 166-170, 251, 285, 286, 316, 319, 329, Sachsse, 117. Sal ford. Upper, 451. Salisbury, 253. Salzburg, 495. 520, 551, 575. Saucon, 254, 273. 330, 337, 521, 562, 564, 635, 641. Saur, 168, 213, 260, 360, 376, 385, 389, 447, 449. Savannah, 258, 562, 606. Schaefier's Church, 336. SchaefFer, 591. Schlatter, 196, 247, 254, 269, 294-472, 592, 661, 683. Schley, 348. Providence, 321, 336, 357, 425. See Trappe. Pury, 171. Purysburg, 256, 262. Pythan, 586. Q R 332, 334, 341, 348. 352, 381, 384, 353-358, 372- 373, 409, 415, 416, 418, 422-435, 449, 580. Rockaway, 255, 345, 359, 553, 571. Rocky Hill, 628. • Rof kso (Raffo), 566, 627, 646. Roth, 591. Rothenbuhler, 535. Roxbury, 75-88. Rubel, 407, 411-434, 505, 522, 683. Runckel, 610, 619, 627-628. S Schlossers, 556. Schnorr, 169-170, 250-252. Schwenkfelders, 200, 207. Schwob, 569, 594, 596, 654, 662. Scotch Church, 437-439, 480- 483. Seneca County, N. Y., 636. Shamokin, 639, 645. Sherers, 640. Sharpsburg, 594, 595. Shippensburg, 626, 640. Schneider, 628. 649. Short Hill, 628. 700 THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH IN U. S. „ Skippack, 104, 120, 121, 125, 131,138,149,153,154,160, 167,184,186,229,235,253, 2(58,325,336,343,542,610. South Carolina, 256, 263- 264, 585. Spangenber^, 644. SpriDgfield, 330, 336, 564, 635, 638, 641. Stahlschraidt, 547, 566, 605, 624-646. Stapel, 538, 542-544, 581. Steiner, 259-261, 371-390, 412-413, 418, 424-436, 496-497, 425, 532, 586. Tanevtown, 576. Tempelman, 88, 108, 341, 372, 416,421, 511, 512. Tennant, 162, 188, 274, 384, 389, 431, 445. Tersteegen, 592, 626. Theus, 263. Thomson, 436-459. Tohickon, 521, 542, 562, 567, 570, 638. United Brethren Church, 593, 650-658. Steiuer, Jr., 575, 661. Steuben, 614-616, 627, Stock, 640, 662, 664. Stoy, 406, 411, 416, 421-422, 449,497,505,511,525,531- 535, 660, 684. St. Paul's, 569. Straub, 252, 322. Suther, 263-264, 612, 649. Swamp, Lancaster County, 512,513. Swamp, Montgomery County, 632. Swatara, 111,235, 236, 240. T U Trappe, 269, 320, 472, 495, 610, 635. (See Providence and New Providence.) 1 roldeuier, 601, 672. Trombauers, 562. Tulpehocken, 49, 50, 106, 162, l(i3, 184. 229,235,239,316, 329, 336, 350, 357, 392, 451, 492. 493, 506, 525, 547, 573, 582, 626, 631. Universalism, 571. Unsinus, 2(5. V Valley, 255. Van Basten, 192. Vandersh)ot, 645. Van Harlingen, 488. Van Home, 546. Verues, 434. Vincent, 240, 450, 495, 610, 613. (See Coventry and Schuylkill.) Virginia, 55, 59, 61, 392,569, . 584, 643, (i47, 687, Appen- dix I. Vock, 374, 385. INDEX OF NAMES, PLACES, &C. 701 W Wack, 570, 571 , 638, 661, 667, Waguer, 573, 5U4, 625, 657. Waldschmidt, 406, 411, 416, 434, 511. Wullauer, 589, 599, 652. Warwick, 235, 239. Washiugton, 164, 527, 161, 617. Weber, 574, 594, 625, 626, 657. Weickel, 628. Weiser, Conrad, 39, 44, 48, 49, 163, 185, 446. Weiser, Rev. C. Z., 646. Weiss, 113, 120-152, 155, 187, 218,268,290,314,317,318, 321,334,352,372,384,392, 408, 410, 414, 416-435, 602-604. Weisseuberg, 518, 520. Westminster, 593. Westmoreland, 574. Weyberg, D., 539, 544 546,, 568,570,571,574,616,624, 633, 635, 637, 642, 679, 685. AVentz, 628, 642. (See Skip- pack.) Weyberg, S., 632. Weymer, 568, 594. Whitefield, 200, 258, 274, 480. Whitehall, 563. White Marsh, 65, 66, 104, 122, 125 White Oaks, 110, 229, 240, 329, 560, 566. Willy, 631, 642. Winchester, Va., 525. Wirtz, 175, 177-182, 186, 189, 192, 274, 286, 287, 305. Wissler. 406, 411, 416, 417, 421-434, 504, 525. Witpen, 66, 325, 343, 365- 367,391,549,561,562,568, 635, 639. Witner, 550, 583, 619. Worcester, 639. Wundt, 548, 588, 590. Wynckhaus, 634. York, 235, 241, 242, 247, 255, 326, 337, 340, 344, 348, 424, 502, 573, 578, 632, 640. Zeltenreich, 168, 201-219, 225-232, 355. (See New Holland.) Ziegel's, 518, 590. Zinzendorf, 168, 201-219, 225- 232, 355. Zollikofer, 294, Appendix I. Zubli, 256-261, 361, 606. Zuberbuhler, 262. Zufall, 582. Zwingli, 592. Date Due ' ' ^ JAW 3 J 7( t ,-^(!'t'^9^i ^iMMMi^ , ^■n-i.Jiiei ^g^ ^^mmi$ ■■a^litfe^-jyM MMl ^ ,,■