Talk:Dutch Reformed Church

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Calvinism Portal Dutch Reformed Church falls within the scope of WikiProject Calvinism, an attempt to build a comprehensive guide to Calvinism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. If you are new to editing Wikipedia visit the welcome page so as to become familier with the guidelines.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the Project's quality scale. See comments
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.

	This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Netherlands, an attempt to create, expand, and improve articles related to the Netherlands on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, visit the project page where you can join the project or contribute to the discussion.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.

[edit] Famous Dutchies?

http://www.ipl.org/div/potus/mvanburen.html says that US president Martin Van Buren was a member of the Dutch Reformed religion. There may be other famous members worth mentioning.

[edit] Most direct descendant?

There are many "descendants" to the Dutch Reformed in the US. Is it really proper to say any one of them is the "most direct" descendant? I think that the reference to descendant churches in the US is fine, but this should be limited to giving examples of large or well-known churches. Thoughts? --KKL 22:21, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] State religion?

"Contrary to popular belief it was never a 'state religion', although the law demanded that every person in a public position should be a communicant member of the Dutch Reformed Church. Relations between governments and the Church were fairly intimate."

This is confusing and contradictory. Some religions which are accepted as "state religions" (e.g., the Church of England) are not compulsory for public office holders. Wulfilia 01:21, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Well, membership of the Church of England definitely was compulsory for officeholders for quite a long time. Apart from that, I would be interested to hear how you would rephrase this sentence. The formal dutch expression during the days of the Republic was that the Dutch Reformed Church was the 'Publieke Religie' , the public religion. But this did not extend any further than that the Church was privileged over others, and that the government kept a tab on church proceedings, i.e. barring National Synods for meeting for over 200 years. --Isolani 11:50, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Yes, C. of E. membership may indeed have been compulsory at various times, but not for a century, and yet it's still acknowledged as the state religion. As to how I might rephrase the sentence, what about:

"Although some take issue with the proposition, the Dutch Reformed Church was in effect a 'state religion', and the law demanded that every person in a public position should be a communicant member. There were close relations between governments and the Church hierarchy."

Wulfilia 11:48, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

I can live with the above rephrase, but would not speak of a Church 'hierarchy' as we are talking of a synodal, not an episcopal, church with there being, technically at least, no hierarchy. --Isolani 12:07, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

If I'm reading all this correctly, it sounds to me like the Dutch Reformed Church was a state religion, insofar as that all government members had to belong to it, but that it was not the only religion - i.e., it was not the mandatory faith for the entire population (as was the case in many other European countries). Is that correct? Funnyhat 20:29, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Controversies formulation

The section controversies says:

As a typically 'broad' church, it always had difficulties accommodating theological differences. The church has undergone numerous schisms throughout its history. The first schism in 1618 led to the Remonstrant church. Other significant schisms include the Afscheiding (Separation) in 1834 and in the Doleantie (The Sorrow) led by Abraham Kuyper in 1886 and, unsurprisingly, the 2004 merger has led to a new schism.

What? I didn't know that! I'm a member of a typical 'broad' church, the Swedish Church, and there's less schisms than in 'low' churches. The analysis must be wrong. The reason for schisms must be something else, such as either the particular theology, or the role the church played in the society. (Besides, I thought Calvinism could actually not be broad church by the theology, but ignorant me!!) Besides, I think the statement makes unverified assumptions. Rursus 15:55, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

I removed the striken text for this reason. Rursus 15:59, 15 April 2007 (UTC)