Theodore Frelinghuysen is a key figure in the history of the Reformed Church in America. Often seen as a dissenter from the Netherlands church, Frelinghuysen is a staunch support of pietistic Calvinism and expected his church to be the same. What Frelinghuysen’s aggressive theology eventually led to was the Conferentie and Coetus schism. The reason for this schism is set on Frelinghuysen’s upbringing in the Netherlands church and his disdain for those who lacked sincerity while worshipping God (Family Quarrels, 43). To understand Frelinghuysen we must be aware of his assumed Cartesian understanding of the self. For Frelinghuysen, he is cognitively aware of himself and accepts an objective rationality (Word and World, 13-14). This understanding
…show more content…
Frelinghuysen was the second Dutch minister ever to serve in the Raritan congregation (The Dutch Reformed Church in the American Colonies, 174). As a Dutch minister and leader of the Coetus movement, Frelinghuysen instituted dramatic changes from the pulpit which can be described as “new measures” (By Grace Alone, 52). The orthodox doctrine and order of the traditional Conferentie was no longer accepted; rather Frelinghuysen replaced order of worship and fixed prayer with a pietism that encouraged experiential religion and sinner’s guilt (By Grace Alone, 48-49). Additionally, Frelinghuysen disregarded a traditional understanding of the Lord’s Table; instead, he expected everyone to have an inner conversion first and only be admitted to receive the sacrament if they have done so (The Dutch Reformed Church in the American Colonies (175-176). Frelinghuysen was known to run his church with an iron fist, excommunicating certain members, ignoring the Rules of Church Order, and allowing untrained clergy to serve alongside of him. Although Frelinghuysen had psychosis which many argue “robbed him of his senses”, he divided the small colony of churches in America and spearheaded the Coetus vs. Conferentie …show more content…
On the one hand, some of the RCA has been influenced by evangelical pietism in their inner-reflections and lack of liturgy. Most RCA churches, however, follow the Worship the Lord liturgy and encourage orthodoxical traditions within worship. Frelinghuysen would be devastated by the “gaudy” construction of many churches and the lackadaisical emotions during worship. In our modern era, congregants are less concerned with individual pietism because, I believe, they are more aware of the world’s problems and would rather put their energy into kingdom-related work. Additionally, Reformed worshippers reject a dual individual conversion and uphold a covenantal theology which marks them sanctified at birth. God’s sovereignty reigns supreme and trepidation over one’s sins seems like a waste of energy. There are more pertinent issues modern RCA churches are dealing with. Overall, if Frelinghuysen attempted to implement his radical pietism in our modern era, he may attract certain congregants, especially within my parents’ generation, but his arrogance and haphazard approach would eventually drive him out of the church
Frelinghuysen was the second Dutch minister ever to serve in the Raritan congregation (The Dutch Reformed Church in the American Colonies, 174). As a Dutch minister and leader of the Coetus movement, Frelinghuysen instituted dramatic changes from the pulpit which can be described as “new measures” (By Grace Alone, 52). The orthodox doctrine and order of the traditional Conferentie was no longer accepted; rather Frelinghuysen replaced order of worship and fixed prayer with a pietism that encouraged experiential religion and sinner’s guilt (By Grace Alone, 48-49). Additionally, Frelinghuysen disregarded a traditional understanding of the Lord’s Table; instead, he expected everyone to have an inner conversion first and only be admitted to receive the sacrament if they have done so (The Dutch Reformed Church in the American Colonies (175-176). Frelinghuysen was known to run his church with an iron fist, excommunicating certain members, ignoring the Rules of Church Order, and allowing untrained clergy to serve alongside of him. Although Frelinghuysen had psychosis which many argue “robbed him of his senses”, he divided the small colony of churches in America and spearheaded the Coetus vs. Conferentie …show more content…
On the one hand, some of the RCA has been influenced by evangelical pietism in their inner-reflections and lack of liturgy. Most RCA churches, however, follow the Worship the Lord liturgy and encourage orthodoxical traditions within worship. Frelinghuysen would be devastated by the “gaudy” construction of many churches and the lackadaisical emotions during worship. In our modern era, congregants are less concerned with individual pietism because, I believe, they are more aware of the world’s problems and would rather put their energy into kingdom-related work. Additionally, Reformed worshippers reject a dual individual conversion and uphold a covenantal theology which marks them sanctified at birth. God’s sovereignty reigns supreme and trepidation over one’s sins seems like a waste of energy. There are more pertinent issues modern RCA churches are dealing with. Overall, if Frelinghuysen attempted to implement his radical pietism in our modern era, he may attract certain congregants, especially within my parents’ generation, but his arrogance and haphazard approach would eventually drive him out of the church