The History of New York

I have listened to the first seven section of Washington Irving’s The History of New York’ and I am amazed! After booking a flight to New York, I considered hopping over to Holland to find the Rosemont cote of arms on the back of one of the chairs in the House of the Swan Brethren.

Washington Irving finds himself in the library of John Cook, who may be a fictional character, or, he may be Henry Brevoort who had a rare library, much of it about Dutch history. Cook gives Washington two books to read that are the foundation of his history; ‘The Heidelberg Catechism, and, the Dutch history compiled by Adriaen Cornelissen van der Donck.

Above is the title pages of two books on the Confessionals, by my ancestor, Gottschalk Rosemondt, and the other, the Heidleberg Catechism. Both have a cote of Arms. One is the cote of arms of Karl Von Habsburg, and the other, the Princes of the Palatinate, from who would rise The Winter King and Queen of Bohemia – and the Battle of White Mountian!

https://renaissancebooks.wordpress.com/

No sooner did I write my last paragraph, they are awake! They are at ready to TAKE BACK AMERICA from the Dark Lord of New York Tower who is backed by the false evangelical cosmology who claim America as their own via the Jesus of our Founding Fathers. But, the Dutch, and their Reformation, was here first. With the Confessional of Rosemondt, I now own religious permission to defeat the minion of John Darby.

The History of New York would make a great movie or T.V. series.

Captain Deidrich Knickerbocker

Captain of the Oaktree

Copyright 2017

“Rosemondt was less dogmatic than most inquisitors and his writings have been compared with those of Erasmus. He was also known as an eloquent vicar and friend of the Dutch Pope Adrian VI.”

In 1641, van der Donck sailed to the New World aboard Den Eykenboom (The Oak Tree). He was immediately impressed by the land, which, in contrast with the Netherlands, was thickly forested, hilly, and full of wildlife. Once in his post, he attracted the ire of Van Rensselaer with his independence. This manifested itself first when the schout selected one of the patroon’s finest stallions for himself and then decided that his appointed farm was poorly chosen and simply picked another site.[3]

In return for this favor, Kieft granted van der Donck 24,000 acres (97 km2) on the mainland north of Manhattan in 1646.[10] He named the estate Colen Donck and built several mills along what is now called Saw Mill River. The estate was so large that locals referred to him as the Jonkheer (“young gentleman” or “squire”), a word from which the name “Yonkers” is derived. By this time, van der Donck had already married the Englishwoman Mary Doughty, whose father had lost his land after irking Kieft.

The Heidelberg Catechism (1563), one of the Three Forms of Unity, is a Protestant confessional document taking the form of a series of questions and answers, for use in teaching Reformed Christian doctrine. It was written in 1563 in Heidelberg, present-day Germany. Its original title translates to Catechism, or Christian Instruction, according to the Usages of the Churches and Schools of the Electoral Palatinate. Commissioned by the prince-elector of the Electoral Palatinate, it is sometimes referred to as the “Palatinate Catechism.” It has been translated into many languages and is regarded as one of the most influential of the Reformed catechisms.

In 1619, Frederick V accepted the throne of Bohemia from the Bohemian estates. He was soon defeated by the forces of Emperor Ferdinand II at the Battle of White Mountain in 1620, and Spanish and Bavarian troops soon occupied the Palatinate itself. Called “the Winter King” because his reign in Bohemia only lasted one winter, Frederick was put under the ban of the Empire in 1623. Frederick V’s territories and his position as Elector were transferred to the Catholic Duke of Bavaria, Maximilian I, of a distantly related branch of the House of Wittelsbach. Although technically Elector Palatine, he was known as the Elector of Bavaria. From 1648 he ruled in Bavaria and the Upper Palatinate alone, but retained all his Electoral dignities and the seniority of the Palatinate Electorate.

After Frederick V’s death, his wife Elizabeth Stuart, Queen of Bohemia, worked tirelessly to have the Palatinate restored to her family and to the Protestant cause. By the Peace of Westphalia in 1648, their son, Charles Louis was restored to the Lower Palatinate, and given a new electoral title, also called “Elector Palatine”, but lower in precedence than the other electorates.

“Rare early edition of this interesting Latin work on confession by the highly respected Louvain (moderate) inquisitor and professor of theology Godschalk Rosemont. The first edition was published in May 1518, followed by an edition of March 1519 (for H.E. van Homberch), this edition, and an edition in 1525, all published by Van Hoochstraten.
Godschalc Rosemondt (1483-1526) of Eindhoven was a distinguished alumnus of Louvain where he was appointed extraordinary professor of theology in 1515 and ordinary professor in 1520. For the half-year August 1520-February 1521 he was rector of the university and it was at this time that he was in communication with Erasmus (cf. Allen Ep. 1153, 1164 & 1172), who called him in one letter: “Vir melior quam pro vulgari sorte theologorum”. Rosemondt was less dogmatic than most inquisitors and his writings have been compared with those of Erasmus. He was also known as an eloquent vicar and friend of the Dutch Pope Adrian VI.

Between 1516 and 1519 he composed many devotional works, all but the Confessionale in Dutch. The Confessionale is partially a translation of the Boecxken van der Biechten but is far more detailed and lengthy. It shares some of its content as well as its amiable tone with the Boecxken, published one year earlier. The content reflects the fact that it is intended for a better-educated reader. It is the first book in which the Summa of Thomas Aquinas is used for resolving conflicts of conscience. For his audacious statements in chapter XX, ‘De excommunicatione’ Rosemondt was rebuked by Pope Benedict XIV, who considered the book to be in discord with the views of the church. Although Rosemondt based his arguments on old concepts of Catholic clerical law, he expanded these principles to a much greater extent than the church was prepared to accept. The conrector of the Latin School at Antwerp, Levinus Linius (+1533) contributed a laudatory poem, printed on the verso of the title. Tentler considers the Confessionale as ‘A work of learning and pastoral wisdom’.

Having worked in Delft for some five years, Henrick Eckert van Homberch moved to Antwerp in 1500 and set up his business in the Huys van Delft. From then on until his death in late 1523 or early 1524 he published at that address a continuous flow of works of quite varied natures — classical authors, romances of chivalry and school books included — though chiefly with a religious content. He provided many of his editions with illustrations, and he several times exchanged woodcuts with Adriaen van Berghen, who was a personal friend. In 1503 he published the Leven ons liefs heeren Ihesu Cristi. According to both title-page and colophon this is a second edition, but no traces have been found of an earlier edition by Van Homberch. In the form of a dialogue between Man and the Scripture, the book relates the story of the life of Christ, occasionally interrupted for a short meditation or a prayer. The title-page woodcut, which depicts the Salvator Mundi, is also found in other works by the same printer.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_in_the_mountain https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_White_Mountain

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blan%C3%ADk

An ancient legend says that a large army of Czech knights led by St. Wenceslas sleeps inside the mountain. The knights awaken to help the Motherland when it is in great danger. According to the legend, when this happens, Blaník’s trees will dry out but an old, dead oak tree under the mountain will turn green and a small spring by the mountain will become a river. Then during an epic battle between the Czechs and their overwhelming enemy the Blaník knights will come to their aid led by St. Wenceslas on his white horse. The enemy will retreat to Prague where they will finally be defeated. Day in the mountain is long as a year on the surface.

Joannes Godschalck ROESMONT

https://rosamondpress.com/2017/09/15/the-rose-wolf-and-erasmus/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Meadows_of_Gold https://rosamondpress.com/2012/06/23/ghiselbertus-roesmont/

Adriaen van der Donck

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Adriaen van der Donck
Adriaen van der Donck 2.jpg

Presumed portrait of Adriaen van der Donck
Born Adriaen Cornelissen van der Donck
c.1618
Breda, Dutch Republic
Died 1655 or 1656
New Netherland
Alma mater Leiden University

Adriaen Cornelissen van der Donck (c.1618 – 1655) was a lawyer and landowner in New Netherland after whose honorific Jonkheer the city of Yonkers, New York is named. In addition to being the first lawyer in the Dutch colony, he was a leader in the political life of New Amsterdam (modern New York City), and an activist for Dutch-style republican government in the Dutch West India Company-run trading post.[1]

Enchanted by his new homeland of New Netherland, van der Donck made detailed accounts of the land, vegetation, animals, waterways, topography, and climate. Van der Donck used this knowledge to actively promote immigration to the colony, publishing several tracts, including his influential Description of New Netherland. Charles Gehring, Director of the New Netherland Institute, has called it “the fullest account of the province, its geography, the Indians who inhabited it, and its prospects…It has been said that had it not been written in Dutch, it would have gone down as one of the great works of American colonial literature.”[2]

Van der Donck is a central figure in Russell Shorto‘s The Island at the Center of the World, which argues, based on newly translated records from the colony, that he was a great early American patriot, forgotten by history because of the eventual English conquest of New Netherland.[3]

Today, he is also recognized as a sympathetic early Native American ethnographer,[4] having learned the languages and observed many of the customs of the Mahicans and Mohawks. His descriptions of their practices are cited in many modern works, such as the 2005 book 1491: New Revelations of the Americas Before Columbus.

Early life[edit]

Van der Donck was born in approximately 1618, in the town of Breda in the southern Netherlands. His family was well connected on his mother’s side, and her father, Adriaen van Bergen, was remembered as a hero for helping free Breda from Spanish forces during the course of the Eighty Years’ War.[5]

In 1638, van der Donck entered the University of Leiden as a law student. Leiden had rapidly become an intellectual center due to Dutch religious freedom and the lack of censorship. At Leiden he obtained his Doctor of both laws, that is, both civil and canon law.[5] Despite a booming Dutch economy, van der Donck decided to go to the New World. To this end, he approached the patroon Kiliaen van Rensselaer, securing a post as schout, a combination of sheriff and prosecutor, for his large, semi-independent estate, Rensselaerswijck, located near modern Albany.[6]

In New Netherland[edit]

Rensselaerswyck[edit]

In 1641, van der Donck sailed to the New World aboard Den Eykenboom (The Oak Tree). He was immediately impressed by the land, which, in contrast with the Netherlands, was thickly forested, hilly, and full of wildlife. Once in his post, he attracted the ire of Van Rensselaer with his independence. This manifested itself first when the schout selected one of the patroon’s finest stallions for himself and then decided that his appointed farm was poorly chosen and simply picked another site.[3]

The patroon expected van der Donck’s primary concern to be the colony’s profit rather than the colonists’ welfare. According to Van Rensselaer, his duty was “to seek my advantage and protect me against loss.”[3] This was to consist mainly of cracking down on the black market and catching those who ran away before their service contracts expired. Instead, van der Donck ignored Van Rensselaer’s orders when told to collect late rent from those who obviously could not pay, protested that colonists could not swear binding oaths of loyalty on behalf of their servants, and began organizing improvements to various mills and the construction of a brickyard. Van Rensselaer’s letters indicate that he became increasingly frustrated with his schout’s behavior, chiding him, “from the beginning you have acted not as officer but as director.”[8]

In his employer’s eyes, van der Donck also spent a disturbing amount of time exploring the surroundings. During these excursions, he learned a great deal about the land and its inhabitants, often neglecting his duties as schout in his eagerness to observe and document as much as he could about this new land. He met local Indians, such as the Mahicans and the Mohawks, ate their food, and became adept at their language. Van der Donck recorded their customs, beliefs, medicine, political structure, and technology in an objective and detailed way.[4]

Unsatisfied in his post and realizing the potential of the land, van der Donck eventually began to use his contacts amongst the Indians to negotiate for land in the Catskills, where he wanted to found his own colony. When Van Rensselaer learned that van der Donck sought to acquire neighboring land to his own, he snapped it up first.[9] Van der Donck’s contract as schout was not renewed when its term expired in 1644.

Early political activism[edit]

Negotiating peace with the Indians

In New Amsterdam, disgruntled colonists had been sending ineffective complaints to the Dutch West India Company about the Director-General of New Netherland, Willem Kieft, who had begun a bloody war with the Indians against the advice of the council of twelve men. Kieft’s War badly damaged relations and trade between the Indians and the Dutch, made life more dangerous for colonists living in outlying areas, and drained the colony’s resources. He exacerbated his relationship with the already financially strained colonists by enacting a tax on beaver skins and beer to fund the war.

In 1645, Kieft tried to mend relations with the Indians and asked van der Donck to assist as a guide and interpreter. At the negotiations, Kieft found himself in the awkward position of coming without the necessary gifts. Van der Donck had not informed Kieft of this important component to negotiations in advance, but happened to have brought an appropriate amount of sewant (wampum), which he loaned to Kieft.

In return for this favor, Kieft granted van der Donck 24,000 acres (97 km2) on the mainland north of Manhattan in 1646.[10] He named the estate Colen Donck and built several mills along what is now called Saw Mill River. The estate was so large that locals referred to him as the Jonkheer (“young gentleman” or “squire”), a word from which the name “Yonkers” is derived. By this time, van der Donck had already married the Englishwoman Mary Doughty, whose father had lost his land after irking Kieft.

Kieft remained out of favor with the colonists in New Amsterdam. Adriaen van der Donck stepped into this environment of political unrest and used his rhetorical legal skills to give voice to the disaffected colonists. Upon his arrival, the tone of the colonists’ petitions suddenly changed. While ostensibly putting himself at Kieft’s disposal as a lawyer and a translator, he was working with disgruntled members of the community to get Kieft recalled and convince the company of the need for a Dutch-style representative government in New Amsterdam.

The Dutch West India Company did decide to remove Kieft from his post in 1645, citing the terrible damage caused to trade by his war against the Indians. But rather than yield to the colonists’ requests for the establishment of local government, the company decided that a stronger Director-General would succeed in squelching political dissent. They chose Peter Stuyvesant. Despite this change, van der Donck continued his flurry of documents against Kieft, apparently using his example now solely to make a case for the creation of a local government.

Board of Nine[edit]

The new director-general tried to take a firm hand with the colonists — it was noted that anyone who opposed Stuyvesant “hath as much as the sun and moon against him”[11] — but eventually he had to agree to the creation of a permanent advisory board. Following a Dutch tradition, eighteen people would be elected, from whom Stuyvesant would choose nine to serve. Van der Donck was among the nine selected in December 1648, and quickly became a leading figure.[12]

Van der Donck began keeping a journal of the colonists’ many grievances against the West India Company, Kieft, and Stuyvesant,[13] planning to synthesize their complaints into a single document to be presented to the Dutch States General. When Stuyvesant got wind of this, he ordered van der Donck put under house arrest, seized his papers, and arranged his removal from the Board of Nine.[13]

Despite this, on July 26, 1649, eleven current and former members of the Nine Men signed the Petition of the Commonality of New Netherland, which requested that the States General take action to encourage economic freedom and force local government like that in the Netherlands.[12] Van der Donck was one of three men selected to travel to the Netherlands to present this request, along with a description of the colony written primarily by van der Donck entitled Remonstrance of New Netherland.[14] The latter makes the case that the colony is unusually valuable and in danger of being lost due to mismanagement under the Dutch West India Company.

Return to the Netherlands[edit]

The Jansson-Visscher map of the American Northeast first published by van der Donck

While in the Netherlands, van der Donck engaged in political and public relations campaigns in addition to organizing groups of new colonists for New Netherland. He repeatedly presented his case to the States General opposite a representative sent by Stuyvesant, Cornelis van Tienhoven.

Public relations campaign[edit]

The case before the States General was delayed because of disruptions within the Dutch government caused by William II of Orange. During this delay, van der Donck turned his attention to public relations. In 1650, he printed his Remonstrance as a pamphlet. His enthusiastic description of the land and its potential created much excitement about New Netherland; so many were suddenly eager to immigrate that ships were forced to turn away paying passengers. A Dutch West India Company director wrote, “Formerly New Netherland was never spoken of, and now heaven and earth seem to be stirred up by it and every one tries to be the first in selecting the best pieces [of land] there.”[15]

To go alongside the Remonstrance, van der Donck commissioned the Jansson-Visscher map of the colony. It showed New Netherland along the original Dutch territorial claim from Cape Hinlopen just south of the Delaware Bay at 38 degrees to the start of New England at 42 degrees and included drawings of typical Indian villages, wild game, and the town of New Amsterdam. The map itself remained the definitive map of the area for over a century, cementing many Dutch place names. It would be reprinted thirty-one times before the mid-18th century.[3]

The States General’s decision[edit]

Two pages from van der Donck’s Description of New Netherland (1655)

Apparently, van der Donck’s decision to go public paid off, because in April 1650, the States General issued a provisional order that the West India Company create a more liberal form of government to encourage emigration to the Dutch colony.[16] They produced their final decision in 1652: the Dutch West India Company was forced to order Stuyvesant to set up a municipal government. A municipal charter was enacted in New Amsterdam on February 2, 1653. The States General also drafted a letter in April 1652 demanding the recall of Stuyvesant to the Netherlands, which van der Donck would personally deliver to the Director-General.

Van der Donck prepared to return to New Amsterdam having successfully secured a liberal government for the colony without the restrictions of the Dutch West India Company and national support for emigrating colonists from the Netherlands to the colonies. He was also reinstated as President of the Board of Nine and would be a leader in the new government.

But on May 29, 1652, before van der Donck could sail for home, the First Anglo-Dutch War broke out, and his hopes for New Amsterdam suddenly and unexpectedly fell apart. The States General feared experimenting in local government in a time of war, and needed the close cooperation of the West India Company (practically a branch of the military) in the struggle, and so rescinded their decision.

Defeated, van der Donck tried to return to New Netherland but, as a demonstrated troublemaker, he was blocked from returning. In the meantime, he took a Supremus in jure degree at the University of Leiden.[17] Still eager to promote the colony, he also wrote a comprehensive description of its geography and native peoples based on material in his earlier Remonstrance. This new book was well-crafted to the interests of his audience, consisting of an analysis of European claims to New Netherland, and extensive description of Indians and their customs, a chapter on beavers, and, finally, a dialogue between a Dutch “Patriot” and a New Netherlander addressing the questions of potential colonists.[18]

Though it was finished and copyrighted by July 1653,[19] because of the war, the publication of Beschryvinge van Nieuw-Nederlant (Description of New Netherland) was delayed until 1655. The book was wildly popular, going into a second edition the very next year; however, it was not published in English until 1841, and then in a translation that eliminated subtleties and often even reversed the intended meaning,[20] so that the editor of a modern edition called the 19th century translation “inept”.[21]

Return to New Amsterdam[edit]

On May 26, 1653, the Dutch West India Company having repeatedly and firmly blocked his requests to sail, van der Donck agreed to retire from public life as the price of being allowed to return home to his family, sending the following petition to the company directors:

The undersigned, Adriaen van der Donck, humbly requests consent and passport of the Board to go to New Netherland, offering to resign the commission previously given to him as President of the community, or otherwise as its deputy, and…to accept no office whatever it may be, but rather to live in private peacefully and quietly as a common inhabitant, submitting to the orders and commands of the Company or those enacted by its director.[22]

This promise seemed to satisfy the directors, and van der Donck received permission to return to New Netherland. Giving up public office was apparently not enough, though: once home he was denied the right to continue practicing law because there was no one of “sufficient ability and the necessary qualifications…to act and plead against the said van der Donck”.[23] These restrictions seem to have not hindered his behind-the-scenes efforts: another political uprising against Stuyvesant broke out just weeks after van der Donck’s return. In December he had to petition for protection from Stuyvesant.[19]

There is no record of Adriaen van der Donck’s death, but he was alive during the summer of 1655, and a statement by Stuyvesant in early 1656 seems to indicate that he was dead. He probably died at his farm in one of a series of Indian raids in September 1655, called the Peach Tree War.[3] He was survived in New Netherland by his wife and by his parents, whom he had separately convinced to immigrate.

Legacy[edit]

Daylighted Saw Mill River in Van Der Donck Park in Getty Square neighborhood of Yonkers. Post Office to left, pedestrian bridge and Train Station ahead, and the park’s boardwalk on right.

Johnson’s translation was long recognized as “defective”[24] and even “inept”,[21] but until 2008 remained the only translation available. Nevertheless, Mariana Van Rensselaer called van der Donck’s Description of New Netherland “an exceptionally intelligent book of its kind”, especially praising its quality as a natural history monograph.[25] Its quality as an ethnography has also been praised by anthropologists and historians.[4] Thomas O’Donnell wrote,

Had he written in English rather than Dutch, his Description would certainly have won from posterity the same kind, if not the same amount, of veneration that has been bestowed on Bradford’s Of Plymouth Plantation. As it turned out, Van der Donck’s book was written, published, widely read, put aside, and, alas, almost forgotten long before Bradford’s book was published at all.[26]

Though the English eventually took over the colony, the city of New Amsterdam retained the municipal charter van der Donck had lobbied for, including uniquely Dutch features, such as a guarantee of free trade.[27]

The Heidelberg Catechism (1563), one of the Three Forms of Unity, is a Protestant confessional document taking the form of a series of questions and answers, for use in teaching Reformed Christian doctrine. It was written in 1563 in Heidelberg, present-day Germany. Its original title translates to Catechism, or Christian Instruction, according to the Usages of the Churches and Schools of the Electoral Palatinate. Commissioned by the prince-elector of the Electoral Palatinate, it is sometimes referred to as the “Palatinate Catechism.” It has been translated into many languages and is regarded as one of the most influential of the Reformed catechisms.

History[edit]

Elector Frederick III, sovereign of the Electoral Palatinate from 1559 to 1576, commissioned the composition of a new Catechism for his territory. While the catechism’s introduction credits the “entire theological faculty here” (at the University of Heidelberg) and “all the superintendents and prominent servants of the church”[1] for the composition of the catechism, Zacharius Ursinus (1534-1583) is commonly regarded as the catechism’s principal author. Caspar Olevianus (1536–1587) was formerly asserted as a co-author of the document, though this theory has been largely discarded by modern scholarship.[2][3] Johann Sylvan, Adam Neuser, Johannes Willing, Thomas Erastus, Michael Diller, Johannes Brunner, Tilemann Mumius, Petrus Macheropoeus, Johannes Eisenmenger, Immanuel Tremellius and Pierre Boquin are all likely to have contributed to the Catechism in some way.[4] Frederick himself wrote the preface to the Catechism[5] and closely oversaw its composition and publication.

Frederick, who was officially Lutheran but had strong Reformed leanings, wanted to even out the religious situation of his highly Lutheran territory within the primarily Catholic Holy Roman Empire. The Council of Trent had just finished its work with its conclusions and decrees against the Protestant faiths, and the Peace of Augsburg had only granted toleration for Lutheranism within the empire where the ruler was Lutheran. One of the aims of the catechism was to counteract the teachings of the Roman Catholic Church as well as Anabaptists and “strict” Gnesio-Lutherans like Tilemann Heshusius and Matthias Flacius, who were resisting Frederick’s Reformed influences, particularly on the matter of the Eucharist.

The Catechism based each of its statements on biblical source texts (although some may call them “proof-texts” which can have a negative connotation). Frederick himself defended it at the 1566 Diet of Augsburg as based in scripture rather than based in reformed theology when he was called to answer to charges of violating the Peace of Augsburg.

The Catechism is divided into fifty-two sections, called “Lord’s Days,” which were designed to be taught on each of the 52 Sundays of the year. A synod in Heidelberg approved the catechism in 1563. In the Netherlands, the Catechism was approved by the Synods of Wesel (1568), Emden (1571), Dort (1578), the Hague (1586), as well as the great Synod of Dort of 1618-1619, which adopted it as one of the Three Forms of Unity, together with the Belgic Confession and the Canons of Dort.[6] Elders and deacons were required to subscribe and adhere to it, and ministers were required to preach on a section of the Catechism each Sunday so as to increase the often poor theological knowledge of the church members.[6] In many Reformed denominations with their origins in the Netherlands, this practice is still continued.

Structure[edit]

In its current form, the Heidelberg Catechism consists of 129 questions and answers. These are divided into three main parts:

I. The Misery of Man[edit]

This part consists of the Lord’s Day 2, 3, and 4. It discusses:

  • The Fall,
  • The natural condition of man,
  • God’s demands on him in His law.

II. The Redemption (or Deliverance) of Man[edit]

This part consists of Lord’s Day 5 through to Lord’s Day 31. It discusses:

III. The Gratitude Due from Man (for such a deliverance)[edit]

This part consists of the Lord’s Day 32 through to Lord’s Day 52. It discusses:

Lord’s Day 1[edit]

The first Lord’s Day should be read as a summary of the catechism as a whole. As such, it illustrates the character of this work, which is devotional as well as dogmatic or doctrinal. The first Question and Answer reads:

What is Thy only comfort in life and death?

The answer is:

That I with body and soul, both in life and death, am not my own, but belong unto my faithful Savior Jesus Christ; who, with his precious blood, hath fully satisfied for all my sins, and delivered me from all the power of the devil; and so preserves me that without the will of my heavenly Father, not a hair can fall from my head; yea, that all things must be subservient to my salvation, and therefore, by his Holy Spirit, he also assures me of eternal life, and makes me sincerely willing and ready, henceforth, to live unto him.

Lord’s Day 30[edit]

The Catechism is most notoriously and explicitly anti-Catholic in the additions made in its second and third editions to Lord’s Day 30 concerning “the popish mass,” which is condemned as an “accursed idolatry.”

Following the War of Palatine Succession Heidelberg and the Palatinate were again in an unstable political situation with sectarian battle lines.[7] In 1719 an edition of the Catechism was published in the Palatinate that included Lord’s Day 30. The Catholic reaction was so strong, the Catechism was banned by Charles III Philip, Elector Palatine. This provoked a reaction from Reformed countries, leading to a reversal of the ban.[8]

In some Reformed denominations Q&A 80 has been removed, bracketed, and/or noted as not part of the original Catechism.[citation needed]

Use in various denominations and traditions[edit]

The influence of the Catechism extended to the Westminster Assembly of Divines who, in part, used it as the basis for their Shorter Catechism.[9]

The Heidelberg Catechism is one of the three Reformed confessions that form the doctrinal basis of the original Reformed church in The Netherlands, and is recognized as such also by the Dutch Reformed churches that originated from that church during and since the 19th century.

Several Protestant denominations in North America presently honor the Catechism officially: the Presbyterian Church in America, ECO (A Covenant Order of Evangelical Presbyterians), the Christian Reformed Church, the United Reformed Churches, the Presbyterian Church (USA), the Reformed Church in America, the Communion of Reformed Evangelical Churches, the United Church of Christ (a successor to the German Reformed churches), the Reformed Church in the United States (also of German Reformed heritage),the Evangelical Association of Reformed and Congregational Christian Churches,[10] the Free Reformed Churches of North America, the Heritage Reformed Congregations, the Canadian and American Reformed Churches, Protestant Reformed Churches, and several other Reformed churches of Dutch origin around the world. Likewise, the Book of Discipline of The United Methodist Church lists it as an influence on United Methodism.

A revision of the catechism was prepared by the Baptist minister, Hercules Collins. Published in 1680, under the title ‘An Orthodox Catechism’, it was identical in content to the Heidelberg catechism, with exception to questions regarding baptism, where adult immersion was defended against infant baptism and the other modes of affusion and aspersion.

About Royal Rosamond Press

I am an artist, a writer, and a theologian.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

1 Response to The History of New York

  1. Reblogged this on Rosamond Press and commented:

    If I had given Lara Roozemond a hundred dollars to sit still while I snapped her pic – with a rose in her teeth – so I could build a story around her, would she have asked for $200 in a e-mail?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.