HOLLAND: THEOLOGY AND RELIGION FROM THE SYNOD OF DORT TO THE
COMMENCEMENT OF THE PRESENT CENTURY.
The only country whose national existence and independence are due to
the Reformation is Holland. To be the first to break the triumphant
power of the Spanish army would have been glory enough for any ordinary
ambition, but no sooner was her independence declared than she gave
signs of great commercial and intellectual activity. Her Hudsons
navigated every sea and planted the Dutch flag on shores not then traced
on any map of the world; her manufacturers supplied all markets with the
fruit of their labor and ingenuity; her soldiers were a match for any
European force; her De Ruyters and Van Tromps knew how to contend with
the Blakes of England; her William of Orange, whom she gave to her
British neighbor, made as good a ruler as ever lived in Whitehall; her
scientific men founded the systems which have continued in use to the
present time; her philosophers revolutionized the thinking of the
civilized world; her universities were the seat of the most thorough
humanistic researches of the age; her painters founded new schools of
art, and vied with the Italian masters; her theologians gave rise to
controversies which brought all churches and their champions within the
scene of conflict; and her pulpit orators acquired a celebrity which, in
spite of the inflexibility of the language, was second only to that
enjoyed by the most renowned preachers of France and Great Britain.
After Holland had fallen a victim to her political partisanship, she
gradually disappeared from public observation. Her greatness in the past
would have been well nigh forgotten if Prescott and Motley had not
recalled it. But the judgment of the world concerning her, in her
present state, is not more flattering than that of the author of
_Hudibras_, who, in addition to venting his spleen against the people,
employs his wit upon the irrational land, calling it,
"A country that draws fifty feet of water,
In which men live as in the hold of nature;
And when the sea does in upon them break,
And drowns a province, does but spring a leak."
But while the political status of Holland has been inferior and
unobserved during the last century and a half, her important theological
and religious career,--covering a much longer period than that,--is a
theme of deep interest to every student of the history of the church.
Rationalism arose in Holland by means of some agencies similar to those
which had produced it in Germany. The previous disputes and barren
ministrations of the clergy made the soil ready for any theological
error that might urge its claims with force. But the repulsive
technicalities of Germany were not equally prevalent in Holland, and
scholasticism refused to affiliate with the Reformed much longer than
with the Lutheran church.
But when the synod of Dort, which held its sessions in 1618-1619,
pronounced those dogmas by which the Arminians were excluded from the
Dutch church, it established a standard of orthodoxy. In proportion as
the synod gained the favor of the people, the Bible came into use, but
more to serve the cause of polemics than of edification. Hugo Grotius,
Erasmus, and other exegetical writers who had manifested independence in
their interpretation of the Scriptures, were regarded with great
suspicion and distrust. The door for the entrance of scholasticism was
thrown wide open. To use the language of a writer of that day, "The
doctrines were cut after the fashions of Peter Lombard, Thomas Aquinas,
and Scotus; while the power of the word of God was denied, and the
language of Babel was heard in the streets of Jerusalem." Theologians
made an idle display of learning. Imaginary distinctions, definitions,
and divisions became the food of the youth in schools of every grade,
and of the congregations in all the churches. The books which have come
down to us from that period are weapons against Atheism, Deism,
Socinianism, and every other heresy that had arisen during the history
of Christianity. Whether light was created on the first day; whether it
was an attribute or a substance; whether Adam, after the formation of
Eve, was a rib the worse; whether the knowledge of the unconverted may
be called spiritual knowledge;--these were some of the topics of labored
sermons. It was announced as a most gratifying result of accurate
research that the soul of a boy was created forty days after conception,
while that of a girl required eighty.
There were exceptions to the general sterility of the pulpit and
lecture-room. Alting, professor at Groningen, enjoyed the sobriquet of
"Biblical Theologian," because he made the Scriptures, and not
scholasticism, the basis of his inquiries. Students from foreign lands
flocked to his auditorium, and received the leaven of his earnest and
reverent spirit. Yet his candidates were distrusted, and he had great
trouble in defending himself against repeated charges of heresy.
But another important feature of the prevalent theology was the
corruption of ethics. The doctrines of grace, of which the church of
Holland had always been the defender, left no room for an ethical
system. What the unconverted man does is nothing but sin; all are
equally guilty; and all that we have of good is from God. If we be
disposed to ask, "Does not this view make men careless and impious?" the
answer comes back from the Catechism, "No; for it is impossible that
those who are planted in Christ should be without the fruits of
gratitude." This opinion had a strong tendency to isolate theology still
more than scholasticism had done, from all practical interests. "What
shall we do?" was an idle question, for, as a matter of course, man
could do nothing. But "what must I be?" was the all-important and
searching inquiry. Thus ethics glided into radical casuistry, and, in
this form, became united with the scholastic theology.
The homiletic literature of that day indicates the unification very
clearly. Besides being a tirade against schismatics of all classes, the
discourse was often a discussion of grammatical principles, accompanied
with a description of the spiritual condition of every hearer. After the
singing of the hymn in the middle of its delivery, the people adjusted
themselves to hear the application in which their cases were to be
stated. There was _first_, an enumeration of "heretical sinners,"
divided into numerous groups; _second_, the "unconverted," separated
into many subdivisions; and _third_, the many flocks of Christians. It
was in this part of the sermon that the casuistry of the preacher had
full play, and he who could subdivide his congregation in such a way
that every auditor could not mistake his own proper position, received
great honor from his brethren. The hearer waited until he "heard his
name called," after which he might sink back again to his dreams. Even
to this day, on leaving a Dutch church, it is a common question among
the separating members to inquire of each other, "Have you heard the
dominie call your name?" They mean by this, "Have you heard the pastor
so describe people that you could not mistake the class to which you
belong?"
We have now stated the two sources from which many of the troubles and
defections of the Church of Holland have sprung. On the one hand was
dogmatism, with its endless distinctions, begotten and fostered by
Scholasticism. On the other, practical mysticism, cherished into
strength by a disgusting system of casuistic ethics. The reaction
against those prevalent errors was Rationalism. They were the domestic
fountains of that species of error.
But there were men who, when they saw the evils their venerated Church
was suffering, threw themselves into the breach, and contended for her
deliverance.
Cocceius, the celebrated opponent of Scholasticism, was born in Bremen,
in 1603. He studied all branches of theology; but having been instructed
in Hebrew by a learned Rabbi of Hamburg, he applied himself especially
to the Scripture languages. In 1629 he visited the Dutch University of
Franeker, and wrote tracts on the Talmud, with extracts therefrom in
German. He also composed Greek verses with great ability. Returning the
same year to Bremen, he there became Professor of Sacred Philology. In
1636 he was called to Franeker, to take the Hebrew first, and afterward
the Greek chair. Still later he taught theology. His exegetical works,
being far in advance of any which had appeared at that time, acquired
great renown for their author. In 1649 he was invited by the Curators of
the University of Leyden to take charge of the department of theology in
that seat of learning. His long-cherished antipathy to Scholasticism was
well known, but he pursued his course in quiet until 1658, when he was
daringly assailed.
Having developed his opinion that the Sabbath had not been instituted in
Paradise, but in the desert, and was not therefore binding upon
Christians, Cocceius was buffeted by a host of writings, in which he was
charged with every imaginable species of skepticism. The literature of
the Cocceian controversy abounds in as violent and harsh expressions as
have disgraced theological history at any time. Yet Cocceius was not
without ardent disciples and friends, who knew as well how to give as to
receive severe thrusts. As an illustration of the method of the
discussion, we mention the title of a book written in favor of Cocceius:
"Satan's Defense of himself, on being questioned why he had instigated
some persons to distort and vilify the orthodox, wise, and edifying
Writings of the Blessed Professor Cocceius, &c., &c." In this work
Satan, on being questioned whom he fears most, replies that "no one has
done more harm to the power of darkness than Cocceius,--not even
Calvin."
The States of Holland wrote to the Synod not to discuss the Sabbatarian
question, and to forbid the combatants from further controversy. There
were other charges brought against Cocceius, however, one of which was
his distinction between +aphesis hamartiôn+ and +paresis hamartiôn+, by
which he held that the former was a complete pardon, but the latter
incomplete, and only in force under the old dispensation. He placed the
whole system of theology under the figure of a covenant. There were two
covenants, one of works, and the other of grace. The latter had a
threefold economy: before the law; after the law; and under the Gospel.
The institutions under the first economy were symbolical of the second;
and these again of the third. Everything was a shadow of some higher and
future good. Forgiveness was no exception to the rule. That of the Old
Testament was +paresis+ preparing the way for the complete +aphesis+ of
the New.
There was one point of agreement between Cocceius and Des Cartes: their
common aim of emancipation from Scholasticism. But the former strove by
revelation, the latter by philosophy to secure the result. It has been
charged that Des Cartes influenced Cocceius, since the school of that
philosopher was growing into power at the very period of the Cocceian
tendencies. But the charge is groundless. Des Cartes stood on the ground
of reason alone, while Cocceius planted himself upon the Scriptures.
Thus there was a world-wide difference between the two men at the very
starting-point of their systems; a difference which becomes more
apparent at every additional step in the study of their sentiments.
If Cocceius was opposed when he arrayed the Bible against Scholasticism,
Descartes might be expected to meet with increased resistance when he
used only the weapon of philosophy. "Aristotle," said the theological
world of Holland, "was a heathen, it is true, but then he afterwards
became soundly converted to Catholicism. In due time he was transformed
into a most exemplary Protestant. Yet this Des Cartes is a downright
Jesuit, and a very demon let loose from the infernal world. His whole
system commences with doubt and is pervaded by it. How dangerous then to
our orthodoxy is the attack of this Catholic Arminian! If his assumption
concerning skepticism be correct our whole theology becomes overturned;
for then the elect would have ground for doubting their own salvation,
which would be opposed to the infallible doctrine of the final
perseverance of the saints. And to crown the scene of this Des Cartes'
audacity, he holds that the earth and not the sun turns round, which, as
good father Brakel says, 'is a sure sign that the man's head is
turned.'"
Voetius was the leader of the forces against the pretentious philosophy.
A book, issued anonymously by a friend of Spinoza, applying a little
more logic to the Cartesian idea of substance, caused him to obtain
additional ground. For the new school which he was combating already
rested under the imputation of Crypto-Atheism. The hand of the
government interfered, and Cartesianism appeared to be extinguished. But
it had its secret admirers, especially in the academies of Northern
France, where its adherents occupied almost every chair of instruction.
Its last representative was Ruard Andala, 1701, at whose death Newton
and Leibnitz came into power.
The place assigned to reason by Cocceius led his foes to accuse him of
Cartesianism. He made the intellect the interpreter of Scripture in this
sense; that, since the words of the Bible are capable of many meanings,
reason must decide which are proper and which improper, and not be
forgetful to derive as much thought as possible from the sacred text;
"for," said he, "the Scripture is so rich that an able expositor will
bring more than one sense out of it." He aimed to find Christ and his
church in each biblical book; but he interpreted every statement as
allegorical, typical or prophetical. Reason as applied by him, became a
light to expose many sides of truth which had never been perceived by
the reigning dogmatism. The result of his labors was the overthrow, in
many minds, of philosophical Scholasticism, but the enthroning of
biblical Scholasticism in its stead. His allegorical method of
exposition led his followers into gross aberrations.
The Cocceians and Voetians were now the two great theological parties
which attracted to their standards nearly every man of promise or note
throughout Holland. The former were the Progressives, the latter the
Conservatives. The Cocceians favored the entrance of new ideas, and
effected the junction of philosophy and theology. The Voetians professed
to desire a reform, but their conduct was not in harmony with their
avowal. While they agreed with their antagonists in calling the Bible
the fountain of light and truth, they held that the fathers of Dort and
the Reformers had digested its contents and explained its meaning in
most excellent summaries, and that "it was for us to light our candles
at those great lights of the church." They were very properly called
"Traditionarians," a name of which they were proud. One of their writers
said, "We have caught up the last voices and words of our ancestors,
those Fathers of whom we are now glad to call ourselves the echo."[89]
The Cocceians studied the original text, and took leave to differ often
from the authority of the translators. Their opponents attached great
value to the translation, and sometimes called it "inspired." The former
delayed not to appropriate the fruits of the latest researches in
science and criticism, in certain cases laying aside fragments of the
text in favor of the suggestions of the most recent editions of
Cocceius. To the Voetians this conduct was not much better than atheism.
They hurled all the curses and plagues of the Bible against every one
who whispered that there could be a mistake in the transcription of a
word or even of a Hebrew vowel-point. The Cocceian brought all his
questions into the pulpit, where he preached them in a manner more
adapted to addle the heads of his hearers than to edify their hearts.
Hebrew grammars were published for the laity. Even women,--among whom
was Anna Maria Schurmann, the adherent and friend of Voetius,--were able
to read the Bible in the original tongues. Nor did they hesitate to take
part in the angry disputes of theologians. The Cocceians ran wild with
their principles of fanciful interpretation. Every prophecy was, in
their view, a treasury of allegorical facts yet to come to pass, and to
be heartily endorsed. The Voetians prided themselves on their
literalism, and named Hugo Grotius as their master. Yet they held that
they never could swallow his abominable Arminianism.
The history of hermeneutics in all times shows that there is but one
step from the literal to the allegorical. So with the Voetians. They
indicated a disposition to yield, and at length became more fanciful and
allegorical than their adversaries had been. They sought the interior
sense of the text, but would be limited by no rules. They spiritualized
the entire contents of the Bible. He who could draw most profit and
instruction from a word was the best teacher, for a scribe must bring
forth from his "heart" both new things and old. Not reason, nor logic,
but experience and feeling must explain every word of God. The Bible
literally became all things to all men. The "inner light" was its great
interpreter. Many people despised scientific students of the truths of
revelation, calling them "slaves of the letter,"--a term which,
singularly enough, is still in common use among the uneducated members
of the church of Holland. The Bible, taken in its real character, was
banished and an artificial volume placed in its stead. Practical
mysticism was now fairly inaugurated. Even conventicles spread
throughout the country, and ignorant men who knew how "to speak to the
hearts of the people" were infinitely preferred to any educated
minister.
The strife ran very high. While there was an assimilation of the
Voetians to the Cocceians in the application of the allegorical
principle of interpretation, there was a moral retrogression of the
latter which greatly reduced their strength. This arose from the
defective views of Cocceius on the sanctity of the Sabbath. His
disciples carried his unfortunate opinion far enough to gain the favor
of the worldly and immoral classes. The freest customs and gayest
fashions were imported from France, and Cocceian ministers made it their
boast that they designed to keep up with the times. More spiritual
adherents became disaffected by the growing impiety. Koelman, a layman,
and Lodensteyn, a clergyman, gave the alarm that the kingdom of Christ
had become secularized and corrupt. The latter would not baptize the
children of unbelievers nor hold any communion with them. De Labadie,
formerly a Jesuit but afterward a French minister, blew the clarion of
reform. The watchword on all sides was, "Separate ye my people." Nothing
but the stringency of his rules and the counter-efforts of the
government prevented the pious masses from joining the reformer.
Mystical sects, influenced by Jacob Boehme and Spinoza, appeared here
and there. Chiliastic ideas spread abroad in proportion as men despaired
of the speedy regeneration of the church through natural
instrumentalities. All was commotion and disruption, and, for a time,
everything seemed to be on the downward course to ruin.
But the imminence of the danger brought a speedy and violent reaction.
The persecution of the French Huguenots drove them across the boundary
line. The Dutch true to their traditional hospitality, received them
with open arms. The guests returned their welcome by diffusing new
spiritual life through the hospitable country. The Cocceians laid off
their worldly habits. Days of fasting and prayer were appointed by the
civil and ecclesiastical authorities, while an increasing love for the
church, as bequeathed by the fathers, was overspreading the land. The
attachment to what was old and time-honored became a glowing enthusiasm.
Sharp distinctions between parties disappeared. Men who had formerly
been violently arrayed against each other now expressed a disposition to
unite in one common effort to restore the church to her former purity.
Brokel, Imytegeld, Groenewegen, Lampe, and Vitringa, representing
different and opposing forces, united in a harmonious effort to reform
the heritage of Christ. Their labors were fruitful, for the people
greatly honored them and earnestly followed their good advice. The
theological candidate had previously been asked two questions, which had
an important bearing upon his subsequent life. One was, "Do you fear
God?" The other was, "To what party do you belong?" The latter inquiry
was now abolished. In every university the long-prevalent partisanship
subsided. But under the improved state of religion, a Voetian was
invariably placed in the chair of dogmatic theology, a Cocceian in that
of exegesis, and a follower of Lampe in charge of practical theology.
The pulpits were likewise supplied with an equal number of ministers
from the ruling parties.
After 1738 the religious progress of the church of Holland became more
tardy. Attention to spiritual life decreased, while more care was
bestowed upon the improvement of theological training. The department
receiving greatest favor was the linguistic study of the sacred text.
Professor Schultens was the first to apply himself to the Hebrew cognate
languages, especially to the Arabic. The critical works of Mill and of
Bengel found their way, in 1707 and 1734, into the Dutch universities.
John Alberti, inaugurated professor at Leyden in 1740, made the Arabic
his special branch, and in five years' time that study became so popular
that Valkenaer found it necessary to warn young men against yielding too
freely to its fascinations. The direction of theological taste to
another department of inquiry increased the indifference to party
distinctions. Henceforth the terms Voetian and Cocceian became more
unfrequent and unimportant.
The theological tendency toward the study of the languages of the Bible
had the single unfortunate result of increasing that puerile literalism
which had appeared in only sporadic forms during several preceding
centuries. It was the element antagonistic to the allegorical and
spiritual interpretation of the text.
Peter Abrest, the Dutch Ernesti, taught in Groningen in 1773. His work
on _Sacred Criticism as the best Safeguard of Theology_, showed the
value he attached to a thorough grammatical and historical study of the
Scriptures. His labors were in harmony with the long-standing literal
interpretation of the text, though he would elucidate scientifically
what had previously been treated mystically. Even before the
Reformation, the Dutch theologians were preëminently textual in their
habits of study, and in subsequent times, they built up their systematic
and polemical theology by the stress laid upon the "words" of the
inspired volume.
Nowhere was the proverb "Every heretic has his letter"[90] so common and
yet so true as in Holland. The old quartos we have received from the
seventeenth and former half of the eighteenth centuries will ever remain
marvels of literalism gone mad. They were gotten up like a geometry,
with theorems and propositions, followed by a lengthy array of texts
transcribed without one word of comment. The sermons published at that
time were divided and subdivided, their appearance being similar to a
page of a dictionary. They were interlarded with Latin, Greek, and
Hebrew letters and figures of various sizes, all being literal
quotations from the Bible, and proving nothing except that the preacher
had made free use of his Concordance. The consequence of so much textual
citation in books and sermons was the increased popularity of theology.
The systematic works of the seventeenth century were familiar to the
masses. What was said of the theological disputes of the third century,
that bakers' and shoemakers' shops reëchoed the words '_homoousian_' and
'_homoiousian_' might be applied to the period of which we speak. Even
now, there exists in Holland a remarkably popular acquaintance with
theology. "I have seen," says a clergyman, "fishermen who could pass
examination for licentiate's orders at one of your American schools, and
beat the best of the candidates in the handy use of texts and
definitions."[91] The descendants of the Dutch settlers in the United
States are still familiar with Brokel; while if you ask any Hollander
what he thinks of John á Marck's _Marrow of Divinity_, he will probably
indicate very soon that he has committed nearly the whole of it to
memory. Francken's _Kernel of Divinity_ is equally well-known to the
masses, for he belonged to the Voetian party. He was eminently practical
and ascetical. He was not without a vein of mysticism, as may be
inferred by the title of one of his works: "_Earnest Request of the
Bridegroom Jesus Christ to the Church of Laodicea to celebrate the Royal
Marriage Feast with Him_."
During the entire period, dating back to the Synod of Dort, there was an
undercurrent of Rationalism, which, though sometimes daring to make its
appearance, observed in general the strictest secrecy. Cartesianism made
it bolder for a time, and in party struggles it ventured to take sides.
But the keen eye which the church ever turned toward heresy made it
timid. Yet it was a power which was only waiting for a strong ally in
order to make open war upon the institutions which the heroes of Holland
had wrested from Philip II. of Spain.
Balthazer Bekker, "a man who feared neither man nor devil," was the
first Rationalist in the Dutch church. He was a disciple of Des Cartes,
and an ardent lover of natural science, particularly of astronomy. He
published a work on Comets, in which he combated the old notions,
prevalent among his countrymen, that a comet was always the precursor of
heresies and all manner of evils, and that it should be made the
occasion for a general call to prayer and fasting. Bayle, of Rotterdam,
a reputed atheist, harmonized with Bekker. Bekker separated between the
sphere of reason and that of religion. Whenever they meet each other it
should be as friends and co-workers. Religion has greater dignity, but
that gives it no right to disregard the authority of reason. When the
Scriptures speak in an unnatural way of natural things, it is high time
for the operation of reason. This idea led to the accommodation-theory,
which, applied to the doctrine of spirits in his book, _The World
Bewitched_ (1691), resulted in Bekker's excommunication. His
Cartesianism, which had taught him to distinguish so rigidly between the
two "substances," matter and spirit, as to deny all action of the one
upon the other, led him to assert that spirits, whether good or bad,
have no influence upon the bodies of men. The Jews ascribed all exertion
of power to angels, through whom God worked mediately. Jesus adapted
himself to these ideas of his times.
Bekker loved to trace all spirit-stories to some plausible origin, and
then to hold them up to the ridicule of the masses. To give substantial
proof of his disbelief in all spiritual influence, he passed many
nights in graveyards, on which occasions he manifested a sacrilegious
hardihood, which, besides making him the wonder of his time, could only
be accounted for by supposing that he kept up secret correspondence with
the devil. "For," reasoned the Dutch theologians, "is not all this one
of Satan's tricks to make us believe that he does not exist, so that he
may capture us unawares?" On account of Bekker's acknowledged merit, the
government took his part, and at his death, paid his salary to his
family. Voltaire said of him: "He was a very good man, a great enemy of
the devil and of an eternal hell.... I am persuaded that if there ever
existed a devil, and he had read Bekker's _World Bewitched_, he would
never have forgiven the author for having so prodigiously insulted him."
In the library at Utrecht there are ten quarto volumes containing
reviews of this book, in which Bekker's personal appearance, said to
have been very unprepossessing, receives a goodly portion of the
censure. His body was believed by his contemporaries to be a most
excellent portrait of the devil himself.
Professor Roell, of Franeker University, started from the Cocceian
principle of freedom of thought. In his inaugural address, he announced
it as his opinion, that Scriptures cannot be interpreted in any safe way
except by the dictates of reason; that reason is the grand instrument by
which we arrive at a knowledge of all truth; and that it is the great
authority for the determination of all theoretical and practical
religion. This author is best known to theologians by his ideas on the
sonship of Christ. He held that Christ could not be a son, for then
there would be a time when he came into being from nonentity. The term
"son" could not signify unity of essence with the Father. "Brother"
would be a more correct word. The only sense in which Christ could be
son was as the divine ambassador. These assumptions brought upon Roell
the charge that he was a Socinian and an Arminian. His principal
opponent was Vitringa.
Rationalistic tendencies increased in both number and force in
proportion as the church decreased in the zeal which it had possessed at
the close of the Cocceian and Voetian controversy by virtue of the
immigration of the exiled Huguenots of France.
Van Os, of Zwolle, attacked the accepted covenantal theory, and the
doctrine of immediate imputation. The latter was a mere scholastic
opinion, not accepted among the doctrines of the church, but yet
maintained by the people as a requisite of orthodoxy. Having gone thus
far, Van Os proceeded to deny a form of infralapsarianism, which was
termed "justification from eternity." Many prominent but bigoted minds,
having long entertained these ultra ideas he was endeavoring to refute,
and some having gone so far as to attempt their introduction into a
revised edition of the confession of faith, Van Os was censured for
heresy. But he took the first opportunity to preach the Protestant
doctrine that every one had the right to test the church-creed by the
word of God. In the opinion of the people this course amounted to a
total renunciation of the creed, and he was accordingly dismissed.
Another dispute, which created attention and attracted the suspicion of
the watchful church, was on toleration. All who dared to defend even the
word, were stigmatized as unpardonable heretics, for Voltaire had just
written in its favor. Pastor De Cock placed himself in danger of
excommunication because he was so rash as to advocate it. He was only
rescued by the interference of the government, and by luckily publishing
that he distinguished between Christian and ecclesiastical toleration.
There were controversies concerning minor points of doctrine, but amid
them all, it was very perceptible that there was a well-organized
disposition to break through the stringent rules of order, and escape
from the control of the vigilant guardians of the church. But whoever
departed a hair's breadth from the doctrinal system laid down in the
confession of faith was charged with skepticism. Van der Marck's
employment of a single term cost him his professorship. But he was
afterwards restored, and died in 1800. Kleman wrote a book, in 1774, on
the _Connection between Grace and Duty_, in which he held that the right
use of those intellectual and spiritual gifts which God has imparted to
us is the condition of his further blessings. He was compelled to
retract his heresy. Ten Broek, of Rotterdam, considered only the death
of Christ expiatory, while his colleagues wished the same to be said of
every act of his life. Because that rash theologian ventured to use the
word "world," in John iii. 16, in its broadest sense instead of
circumscribing it to "the world of the elect," he had the choice either
to recant or give up his office. The government interfered and saved
him.
But while all these influences were at work in the church of Holland, a
still stronger current was setting in from England. The impolitic
ecclesiastical rigor became an enemy to truth, and contributed
powerfully to the development of Rationalism. Never have church and
state presented a more complete contrast. The government of Holland was
the most liberal in the world, but the ecclesiastical authorities have
not been surpassed in bigotry during the whole history of
Protestantism. Holland was the refuge and home of the exile of every
land who could succeed in planting his feet upon her dyke-shores. But
the church of that country was so illiberal that the use of a term in
any other than the accepted sense was a sufficient ground of
excommunication.
The intimate relations in which Holland stood to England by the
accession of William and Mary to the British throne afforded an
opportunity for the importation of English Deism. Nowhere on the
Continent was that system of skepticism so extensively propagated as
among the Dutch. The Deists took particular pains to visit Holland, and
were never prouder than when told that their works were read by their
friends across the North Sea. On the other hand, Holland supplied
England with the best editions of the classics then published in Europe,
some of which are still unsurpassed specimens of typography.
The works of Hobbes appeared in Amsterdam in 1668, his _De Cive_ having
been issued as early as 1647. Locke's _Epistle on Toleration_ was
translated into Dutch in 1689, while his _Essay on the Human
Understanding_ was rendered not only into that language, but also into
the French. Collins and Chubb were read scarcely less by the Hollander
than by the Englishman. Locke spent seven years in Holland, and Toland
studied two years in Leyden. Shaftesbury resided among the Dutch during
the year 1691, and made a second visit in 1699. The adversaries of the
Deists enjoyed the same privilege, and did not hesitate to improve it.
Burnet became a great favorite in Holland. Lardner, who spent three
years there, was well known to the reading circles, for his works were
translated into their tongue. Lyttleton, Clarke, Sherlock, and Bentley
received no less favor. Leland enjoyed a cordial introduction by the pen
of Professor Bonnet, while Tillotson had his readers and admirers among
even the boatmen in the sluggish canals of Leyden, Rotterdam, and
Amsterdam. But the Deists of England gained more favor in Holland than
their opponents were able to acquire. The former were bold, while the
latter were timid and compromising. Consequently a brood of domestic
Deists sprang up, who borrowed all their capital from their English
fathers. Patot, a follower of Lord Herbert of Cherbury, referred to
Christ by asking, "What do we trouble ourselves about the words of a
carpenter?" He wrote his _Fable of the Bees_, to ridicule the doctrines
of the atonement and resurrection.
But as English Deism was reinforced by the atheism of France before the
invasion of Germany by either, so did the same copartnership take place
in reference to Holland.
The works of the French skeptics were as copiously distributed in
Holland as at home. Many of them were issued by Dutch publishing houses.
Des Sandes published his _Reflections on Great Men_, in Amsterdam;
Toussaint's _Morals_ gained the honor of more than one edition in the
same city; and De Prades, who had been condemned by the Sorbonne on
account of the thesis by which he tried to gain his baccalaureate,
published his _Defense_ in Amsterdam in 1753. It was in this work that
he compared the miracles of Jesus to those of Æsculapius. Hase says that
it was in Holland, and not in London, that the _Système de la Nature_
first came to light. Rousseau's _Émile_, which had been burned by the
sheriffs in France, had the largest liberty afforded it beyond the
northern frontier. The Dutch would not be sated with Volney until they
had published and read three editions of his works.
Voltaire was very popular throughout the country. A number of
periodicals arose, having the avowed object of disseminating the views
of himself and his friends wherever the Dutch language was spoken. La
Mettrie, driven from France, here found a home. Voltaire barely escaped
the Bastille by fleeing thither, though when he left the land which had
given him shelter, he bade it the graceful farewell: "Adieu canals,
ducks, and common people! I have seen nothing among you that is worth a
fig!" But Voltaire had cause to cherish no very pleasant feelings toward
Holland. Her great men had received him coldly. His excessive vanity was
never so deeply wounded as by the sober Dutchmen. Desiring to make the
acquaintance of Boerhaave, the most celebrated physician in Europe, he
called upon him, stating that he "wished to see him." Instead of
becoming rapturous at the Frenchman's compliment, the plain old Leyden
burgher coolly replied: "Oh, sit as long as you please, sir, and look at
me; but excuse me if I go on with my writing." On offering one of his
philosophical books to Professor Gravesande, the latter returned it to
Voltaire in a few days with only this comment: "You are a poet, sir; a
very good poet, indeed!"
The chief disaster resulting from the French skeptical writings was not
so much the skeptical indoctrination of the people as the general
diffusion of a light and frivolous indifference to all religion. Through
the influence of France the Dutch became enslaved to vicious customs,
taste, modes of thought, and conversation. The etiquette of the
Parisians was domesticated among their northern imitators. The works
published in Holland were mere reproductions from the French, and many
of them were written in that language. The simplicity, truthfulness,
and attachment to old forms, which had so long existed, gave place to a
general spirit of innovation. The reverential and determined spirit that
had enabled their forefathers to gain their independence was no longer
apparent in the children. Liberal to a fault, Holland was now paying the
penalty of her excessive hospitality. Sensuality and superficial
epicureanism were at once the taste and the destruction of many of the
young minds of the country.
When the people of Holland began to awaken to their condition, they were
seized with a spirit akin to despair. The coldness of the church amid
all the attempts to destroy the basis of her faith appeared as the chill
of death. When the learned societies offered a prize in 1804 for the
best work on _The Cause and Cure of Religious Apathy_, they could not
find one to crown with their medal. Holland, finding herself unable to
keep pace with the quick step of French recklessness and irreligion,
bethought herself of finding refuge in Gallic politics. "Our people,"
says Bronsveld, "then became a second-hand on the great dial of the
French nation." Old men are now living who have not forgotten those days
when all distinctions vanished, when the only name heard was "burgher,"
and when the skeptical and daring favorites of the people obtained seats
in the national assembly. Religion was driven from the elementary
schools and also from the universities. The chairs of philosophy and
theology were united, for it was enjoined that no doctrine should be
taught in future but natural theology and ethics. The Sabbath was
abolished.
Then came Napoleon Bonaparte. He presented his plea, was received with
open arms, and returned his thanks by draining the country of its
treasures. It was only when the people felt the physical sting of his
wars, and saw the indescribable moral dearth pervading their country,
that they resolved to go back to the old paths and the good way, and to
abandon all deference to French examples. On the occasion of the great
jubilee of 1863, which commemorated deliverance from the yoke of France,
there was heard throughout Holland but one note of joy: "Thanks be unto
the Lord who hath delivered the nation from the ruin which it had
prepared for itself, and into which infidelity had thrust it!"
FOOTNOTES:
[89] Owenusters.
[90] "Jedere Ketter heeft zyn Letter."
[91] Extract from a letter of Rev. P. J. Hoedemaker, dated September,
1864. The correspondence of this accomplished scholar, who has been some
time in connection with the University of Utrecht and in intimate
relations with the best minds of Holland, has been invaluable to us in
the preparation of the Chapters on Dutch Theology.