Abstract
Frelinghuysen’s theological thinking was neither creative nor imaginative, yet his influence in the developing structures of American theology was enormous. His role was that of a transmitter between the Old World and the New; his great contribution was his infusing into the Middle Colonies that Dutch evangelical pietism which he carried within himself. He wrote no systematic theology nor any other known surviving theological treatise, but his theology can be reconstructed from his numerous sermons and letters which do remain. To rely upon sermonic material for such an analysis could lead to a certain imbalance that might have been corrected by a reasoned theological treatise; nonetheless, the salient points of his thinking are introduced and a coherent theological system is presented in bits and pieces. It is from these writings that the following analysis is derived.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
This work, translated into Dutch by Frelinghuysen’s professor, Johannes Wilhelmius, was used by many of the Reformed as a basic textbook in theology well into the 19th century. The first American edition was printed in Philadelphia in 1824 and a second printing followed the next year; as far as I have been able to determine, it was never translated into English; the American printings were of the Latin text.
Indeed, à Marck, along with UnderEyck and others, participated in the academic disputations which gave rise to Essenius’ Systerna. (Essenius, pp. [vii–viii]).
See, for example, DP [2] 67 (S 89), S 330.
Meiners, Levens-beschryvinge van... Everhardi, p. 69.
DP [2] 18 (S 62).
EcR 2385.
BL 92 (S 234).
BL 73, 79 (S 217, 223).
CD 95. The puritans of New England had also compared their newly-found wilderness to the wilderness events of the Scriptures. They identified themselves with the children of Israel and the wilderness theme assumed for them, too, the transforming eschatological implications of the biblical narrative. Frelinghuysen stood in a long and continuing tradition when he thought of himself and his Raritan flock in this context. For further development of this motif see George H. Williams’ “A seminary in the wilderness” in the Harvard Library Bulletin, v. 13 (1959), pp. 369–400 and v. 14 (1960), pp. 27–58.
DP [2] 68 (S 89–90).
DP [2] 40 (S 76).
This was Meiners’ Kort ontwerp van de praktyk des Christendoms, of De praktikale godtgeleertheit, first printed in Groningen in 1734.
This saying, quoted by Cicero in his de Legibus III. 3, should read in full: Salus populi suprema lex esto. (This has been adopted as the motto of the state of Missouri.) The copy referred to is in the Andover-Harvard Theological Library.
Verschuir’s major work was Waarheit in het binnenste, of Bevindelyke godtgeleertheit, first published in 1736. (Hereafter cited as his Bevindelyke godtgeleertheit.) The Rotterdam-Groningen edition of 1739 was used for this study.
VK iv (S 339).
Though this form was an ancient one, it was in part Teellinck’s Sleutel der devotie (Key to devotion) which established it as an increasingly popular technique for theological writings.
Kort ontwerp van de leere der waarheid, p. 18.
DP [2] 72 (S 92).
VK 20 (S 366).
Van der Linde, S., De leer van den Heiligen Geest bij Calvijn, Utrecht, 1943, discussed in the “Inleiding,” pp. 1–7.
BL 136 (S 277).
TV 20 (S 114).
CD 73.
S 333.
The sermon, preached on the text Isaiah 66, verse 2, was printed in DP [1]–35 and translated as “The poor and contrite God’s temple” in S [25]–49.
DP 21 (S 39).
VK 21 (S 367).
S 333.
BL 80–81 (S 225).
S 302, 308.
S 326. This work of Mather’s was printed in Boston in 1727 and is the only English-language publication cited by Frelinghuysen.
S 326. “Earthquake theology” was a powerful moving force in the 18th century and colonial clergy preached numerous sermons on the subject. Nor was it limited to American evangelicals, as is evidenced in L. E. Elliott-Binn’s study of 18th century Britain, The early evangelicals, London, 1953, pp. 236–237.
DP 23 (S 41).
TV 23 (S 117).
Witsius, Twist, p. [xv].
Ibid., p. [xv]; see also DP 28 (S 44).
Witsius, Twist, p. 172. This reference by Witsius to Bernhard is captioned in the “Register” as an “Oversoete plaets uyt Bernhardus.” Gerardus Outhof also made critical reference to this aspect of Bernhard but excused it because of the “darkness of popery” at that time. (G. Outhof, Afscheids-kerkrede van Embden, pp. 172–173 [i.e. 272–273].)
BL 138–139 (S 280).
CD 83.
TV 53 (S 144).
TV 50 (S 142); see also TV 57 (S 148).
TV 13 (S 108).
VK 27 (S 374).
DP [2] 10 (S 56–57); see also DP 6 (S 28–29).
BL 83 (S 227).
TV 13 (S 108).
BL 118 (S 260).
Kort ontwerp van de leere der waarheid, p. 42.
Meiners, Levens-beschryvinge van... Everhardi, p. 141.
BL 37 (S 183).
Much of the general substance of this position is succinctly presented in three articles by A. A. van Ruler: “De bevinding, proeve van een theologische benadering,” in Kerk en theologie, v. 1 (1950), pp. 71–90;
Much of the general substance of this position is succinctly presented in three articles by A. A. van Ruler: “Licht- en schaduwzijden in de bevindelijkheid,” in Kerk en theologie, v. 5 (1954), pp. 131–147;
Much of the general substance of this position is succinctly presented in three articles by A. A. van Ruler: “De bevinding in de prediking,” in Schrift en kerk, Nijkerk, 1953, pp. 161–186.
In the sense that one can justifiably use this term of Augustine, as many present-day writers do, it would be equally valid to use it here.
BL 112–113 (S 255).
Kort ontwerp van de leere der waarheid, p. 78.
An excellent analysis of Witsius (1636–1708) is to be found in J. van Genderen’s study of his life and thought, published in 1953.
First printed in 1665, the Practycke (Witsius’ second work) was frequently reprinted; it was also translated into German and published in Hanau in 1715.
First printed in 1669, the Twist des Heeren (Witsius’ third work) was also frequently reprinted, though apparently never translated. It was unfortunate that the two works of Witsius which had the greatest influence on the Dutch pietists, were not accessible to those who read only English or Latin.
Meiners, Levens-beschryvinge van... Everhardi, pp. 68–69.
Koelman, De historie van den christelijken sabbath, Amsterdam, 1685, p. 356.
BL [4] (S [153]).
d’Outrein, De redenen van vreese en hope, Amsterdam, 1702–1708, v. 1, pp. 2–3.
Ibid., v. 1, pp. 51–52.
Van Genderen, Herman Witsius, pp. 245–246.
Ibid., pp. 244–245.
Witsius, Twist des Heeren met sijnen wyngaert, Utrecht, 1710, chapter XVII, pp. 165–185.
Ibid., chapter XVIII, pp. 185–213.
Ibid., p. 209.
Ibid., pp. 210–211.
Ibid., pp. 211–213.
Though Frelinghuysen mentioned only William Guthrie specifically, he continually reflected the thought found in the other Dutch translations of the puritan writings.
VK (S 339).
Verschuir, Bevindelyke godtgeleertheit, p. [xxxiv]. The term letterwyse was used by Verschuir as one would today use letterlyk, implying thereby literalmindedness or superficiality.
TV [3]–30 (S [99]–124).
Ecclesiastes 7, verse 20.
TV 5–6 (S 101).
Freeman, De weegschaale der genade Gods, p. 188.
TV 6–7 (S 102).
VK 27 (S 374).
DP 27 (S 44).
s DP 29 (S 45).
S 331.
S 329.
S 314.
TV 39 (S 132).
For this category Verschuir usually used the word onkundig, though sometimes the word onweetend; in Frelinghuysen’s extant sermons, he used the word onweetend.
DP [2] 12 (S 58).
VK 23 (S 369–370).
TV 59 (S 150).
VK 22–23 (S 369).
BL 129 (S 270); TV 37–38 (S 132–133).
S 313.
DP [2] 10–11 (S 57).
S 330.
BL 130 (S 272).
John 3, verse 3.
See, for example, TV 11 (S 106) and BL 115 (S 258).
TV 11 (S 106).
TV 24 (S 118).
TV 47 (S 139).
The Synod of Wesel, held in November of 1568, was intended to gather the dispersed Dutch Protestants in a national synod. Though this hope did not materialize, the gathering prepared the way for the Synod of Emden in October of 1571.
DP [2] 74 (S 94); “Acta Synodi tot Wesel”, chapter 2, paragraph 23. (Reprinted in Ens, J., Kort historisch berigt van de publieke Schriften, Utrecht, 1733, p. 264.)
VK 23 (S 369).
BL 128–130 (S 270–272).
BL 128–129 (S 270–271).
TV 50 (S 142).
Kirchen-Ordnungen... Gülich, Cleve, Berge und March, p. 10.
This new emphasis which the pietists introduced did not go unresisted among the more conservative churchmen. Typical of this opposition was Joan van den Honert, T. H. zoon, who wrote an “Academische redenvoering over de wedergeboorte.” This was published together with orations of Franciscus Fabricius in a pamphlet entitled, Leer-redenen uytgesproken...
TV 21–22 (S 115–116).
BL 115 (S 258).
BL 115–116 (S 258).
Kort ontwerp van de leere der waarheid, p. 109.
Verschuir, Bevindelyhe godtgeleertheit, p. 193.
VK 26 (S 373).
S 330.
S 330.
DP [2] 73–74 (S 93).
TV 53 (S 144).
This is his Zelfs-onderzoek eenvoudig voorgesteld in zeven zamenspraken. The edition used for this study was published in Leiden about 1860, though it seems first to have been published in Amsterdam in 1740.
Entitled Een christens zelfs onderzoek, this tract was published by Douci in Amsterdam together with a Dutch translation of Een roepende stem aan de sluimerende christenen, Amsterdam, 1739.
Teellinck, De worstelinghe eenes bekeerden sondaers, Vlissingen, 1631, p. 162.
Freeman, De weegschaale, p. 496.
Isaiah 66, verse 2.
DP 6 (S 28).
This was also reflected in the first question of the puritan-influenced Westminster Catechism. “Man’s chief end is to glorify God and to enjoy Him forever.”
DP 32 (S 47).
TV 24–25 (S 118–119).
Kort ontwerp van de leere der waarheid, p. 79.
VK 55 (S 408–409).
TV 16–17 (S 111).
TV 19 (S 114).
TV 10 (S 106).
TV 22 (S 117).
BL 79 (S 223).
BL 98 (S 240).
BL 102 (S 244).
Witsius, Juda ontkroont, ofte Treurpredikaatsie over Jeremiaes Klaagliederen Cap. 5, vs. 16, Utrecht, 1695, pp. 8, 19f. This is also developed in his Twist, pp. 145–155.
DP 14 (S 34).
à Marck, Kort opstel der christene got-geleertheit, p. 582.
DP 15 (S 35).
Witsius, Twist, p. 173.
DP 16 (S 36).
DP [2] 7 (S 54–55).
BL 16 (S 163).
Kort ontwerp van de leere der waarheid, p. 58.
TV 8 (S 103).
The imagery of the mirror, based in part on Paul’s letters to Corinth, was frequently used by the self-analyzing pietists. Willem Teellinck had prepared a mirror (Den Spiegel der zedigheyt), as did both Freeman and Frelinghuysen a century later.
BL 112 (S 255).
Verschuir, Bevindelyke godtgeleertheit, p. 179. Verschuir discusses this topic from many points of view, making clear its pivotal importance, pp. 178–198.
Witsius developed this position in his major dogmatic study, De oeconomia foederum Dei cum hotninibus, first published in 1677. In its Latin form it was widely read throughout Reformed circles, even in the New World. Jonathan Edwards numbered it among his books and Witsius himself sent an inscribed copy to the library in Boston. (Both of these venerable copies are now in the Andover-Harvard Theological Library.) In 1686 it appeared in a Dutch translation as Vier boecken van de verscheyden bedeelinge der verbonden Gods met de menschen. By the end of the 18th century English translations had been published in London, Edinburgh and New York under the title, The economy of the covenants between God and man. The great importance of the Witsian interpretation of the covenant for the development of American theology was effected more particularly through the various schools of theology in New England.
Schrenk, G., Gottesreich und Bund im älteren Protestantismus, vornehmlich bei Johannes Coccejus, Gütersloh, 1923, p. 2891.
DP [2] 311. (S 71f.).
BL 111 (S 254).
DP [2] 6 (S 54).
à Marck, Kort opstel, p. 378.
BL 31 (S 177–178).
From Everardus van der Hooght’s “Voorreden” (p. 103) to the Geestelyke opwekker (Amsterdam, 1740) of Jodocus van Lodenstein. Van der Hooght (1642–1716) was most famous as an extraordinary scholar and teacher of Hebrew. He was also a devoted follower of Lodenstein and edited several of his books.
DP 25–26 (S 42–43).
DP [2] 6 (S 54).
BL 118 (S 260).
Myseras was a member of the congregation in that old center of pietism, Middleburg. There, where Willem Teellinck had long before planted the seeds of English puritanism, Myseras wrote his numerous popular tracts. Not only were they avidly read and frequently reprinted in the Netherlands, but even a German translation was later printed in Pennsylvania.
This was his Het kinderdeel der vroome. The edition used in this study was printed in Rotterdam in 1733.
Ibid., p. 16. Such pietistic jingles were scattered through much of Myseras’ work.
BL 143 (S [285]).
Whitefield’s doctrine of election distinguished his kind of methodism, or moral preci-sionism, from that of the Arminian-minded Anglican, John Wesley. It has since continued to separate Calvinistic Methodism from Wesleyan Methodism. This is helpfully discussed and evaluated in the Afrikaans dissertation, Het methodisme, by Jacob Daniel du Toit, Amsterdam and Pretoria,.1903. This point is also raised by W. Mallinckrodt in his article on Sicco Tjaden, particularly p. 44 f.
CD 75.
DP [2] 44 (S 79).
TV 25 (S 120).
VK 41 (S 392).
Morgan, The history of the kingdom of Basaruah, p. 166.
The Dutch word is toebrengen. It is an 18th century Dutch usage and could best be translated by the archaic English word “suppeditate.”
Meiners, Levens-beschryvinge van... Everhardi, p. 17.
Ibid., p. 17.
BL 146–147 (S 288–289).
BL 26–42 (S [173]–188).
BL 28 (S 175).
BL 29 (S 176).
VK 48–49 (S 400–401).
Kort ontwerp van de leere der waarheid, p. 34.
Ibid., p. 32.
BL 19–20 (S 166).
Meiners, Kort ontwerp, pp. 212–217.
VK 45 (S 397).
This is the basis of the discussion by C. Graafland, De zekerheid van het geloof. Een onder-zoek naar de geloofsbeschouwing van enige vertegenwoordigers van refortnatie en nadere reformatie, Wageningen, 1961.
The printed text reads verse “32”. Frelinghuysen actually elides verses 38 and 39 as in the above translation.
TV 9–10 (S 104–105).
DP 23 (S 41).
This work, De natuur en gronden des geloofs, is cited hereafter from the 3. druk printed by Johannes Hasebroek in Leiden in 1757.
Ibid., pp. 45–54.
Kort ontwerp van de leere der waarheid. p. 74.
Van Thuynen, T., Korte uitlegginge van het gereformeerde geloof, 3. druk, Leeuwarden, 1722, pp. 13–49. This attack opened a heated battle between van Thuynen (1679–1742) and his opponents, led by Antonius Driessen, one of the Groningen professors who had signed the approval of Frelinghuysen’s BL.
Klagte, pp. 99–101.
CD 84.
DP [2] 7 (S 54–55).
DP [2] 9 (S 56).
Heidelberg Catechism, question 86, pp. 87–88.
Ursinus (1534–1583) was the basic author of the Catechism, though his colleague Caspar Olevianus (1536–1587) played an important part in the final redaction of the text. True to Ursinus’ own theological position, therefore, the basic fabric of the Catechism remained Melanchthonian.
Ursinus, Schat-boek der verklaringen over den Nederlandschen Catechismus, 3. druk, Gorinchem, 1736, v. 2, pp. 199–205. Though Frelinghuysen himself used the Latin text of this work, this Dutch edition was more widely used among the New Netherlanders generally and, therefore, is the edition cited in this study.
TV 58 (S 149).
TV 8–9 (S 104).
TV 25 (S 119).
TV 59 (S 149).
DP [2] 78 (S 96–97).
TV 12 (S 107).
à Marck, Kort opstel, p. 704.
BL 112 (S 254).
BL 110 (S 250–251).
BL 115 (S 255).
CD 76.
Heidelberg Catechism, question 64, p. 64.
Van Santvoord, Samenspraak, p. 166.
DP [2] 9 (S 56).
BL 108 (S 249).
VK 40 [i.e. 50] (S 403).
VK 28 (S 375–376).
Udemans, De leeder van Iacob, dat is corte ende naecte af-beeldinghe van den rechten wegh na den kernel, in sekere trappen onderscheyden. Bound, as issued, with his Christelycke be-denckingen, Amsterdam, 1628.
Kort ontwerp van de leere der waarheid, p. 84.
BL 20 (S 166).
VK 56–57 (S 411).
BL 23 (S 169).
DP [2] 9 (S 56).
TV 11 (S 106).
TV 50 (S 142).
DP 2 (S 26).
BL 36 (S 182).
DP 6 (S 28).
BL 50–51 (S 196–197).
Meiners, Kort ontwerp, p. 393. Meiners has, in fact, a short chapter entirely devoted to precisionism, pp. 393–398.
Ibid., p. [ix].
Voetius referred particularly to Daniel Dyke’s The mystery of self-deceiving.
This was Bolton’s A discourse about the state of true happiness.
Voetius, G., Proeve van de kraght der godsaligheydt, 2. druk, Utrecht, 1656, p. 14.
Voetius, “Aen den godtvruchtighen leser,” p. [xviii]. Voetius’ position did not go unchallenged. His former friend and later vituperative opponent, the Groningen professor Martinus Schoock, wrote a lengthy exposition of and attack upon Voetius’ precisionism. This learned treatise against the “Pseudo-Praecisismus Doctoribus” was entitled: Tractatus de praecisitate vera oppositus pseudopraecisimo pro vindiciis genuinae praxious pietatis, Groningen, 1658. It was also intended to show the public that “Voetius was not an infallible Doctor.” (pref. p. [xii])
Witsius, Twist, p. 252.
CD 91–92.
CD 77.
Udemans’ Practycke repeatedly names these minutiae. They are handily summarized in Meertens’ article on Udemans, p. 76.
Meiners, Kort ontwerp, p. 398.
This was his Spiegel die niet vleyt, original lost, translation in CD [63]95. Text included as Appendix 1.
CD 82.
TV 21 (S 116).
BL 21 (S 167).
TV 15 (S no).
DP 35 (S 49).
Meiners, Kort ontwerp, p. 513.
Ibid., p. 517.
VK 60 (S 415).
S 314.
Udemans presented this point most forcefully in his De laetste basuyne, Dordrecht, 1635.
VK 47 (S 399).
VK 46 (S 399).
Lee, Umphrey, The historical background of early Methodist enthusiasm, N.Y., 1931, pp. 127–129.
DP 8 (S 30).
BL 128–129 (S 271).
VK 31–32 (S 379–380).
DP [2] 8 (S 55).
DP [2] 8 (S 55).
TV 48 (S 140).
VK 23 (S 369–370).
Heidelberg Catechism, question 84, p. 84.
CD 79–80.
Kort ontwerp van de leere der waarheid, p. 56.
BL 104–119 (S [247]–262).
BL 108 (S 251).
For example, see VK 58 (S 412).
Kort ontwerp van de leere der waarheid, pp. 204–209.
Meiners, Levens-beschryvinge van... Everhardi, p. 144.
This Calvin sought to do in his first theological publication, Psychopannychia. As well as presenting his own ideas, Calvin sought to counteract the teaching of the Anabaptists.
This played a more important role among the Lutheran pietists than among the Reformed. Among the Lutherans the doctrine was most particularly perfected by Johann Albrecht Bengel (1687–1752), though his work culminated a long tradition.
à Brakel, W., Redelijke godsdienst, v. 3, pp. [157]–165.
This Witsius discusses in the context of the return and gathering of the Jews in his Vier boecken van de verscheyden bedeelinge der verbunden Gods, pp. 866–875 (Book 4, chapter 15, paragraphs 20–37).
à Marck, Kort opstel, pp. 669–670.
Ibid., p. 670.
There was no general consensus of opinion; both Coccejus and d’Outrein presented still different points of view. (d’Outrein, De redenen van vreese en hope, Amsterdam, 1708, v. 3, PP. 135–158.)
The book of martyrs to which Frelinghuysen referred was the popular De historien der vromer martelaren of Adriaan van Haemstede. The first edition, printed in 1559, was entitled: De gheschiedenisse ende de doodt der vromer martelaren. Van Haemstede (ca. 1525-ca. 1562) pastored various exile congregations in Antwerp, London and in Emden. His history went through numerous editions and was placed together with Josephus and the Bible in most Dutch Reformed homes.
Quoted by Frelinghuysen from the account of Theodorus à Brakel’s last hours, appended to his De trappen, p. 433.
VK 58 (S 412).
BL 99 (S 241).
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1967 Springer Science + Business Media B.V.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Tanis, J.R. (1967). Of God and Man. In: Dutch Calvinistic Pietism in the Middle Colonies. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-0611-3_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-0611-3_4
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-015-0132-3
Online ISBN: 978-94-015-0611-3
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive