Title Spinoza and the Collegiants Author(s) Bunge, Wiep van Citation Philosophia OSAKA. 7 P.13-P.29 Issue Date 2012-03 Text Version publisher URL https://doi.org/10.18910/23294 DOI 10.18910/23294 rights ©2012 by Wiep van BUNGE. All rights reserved. Note Osaka University Knowledge Archive : OUKA https://ir.library.osaka-u.ac.jp/ Osaka University Philosophia OSAKA No.7, 2012 13 Wiep van BUNGE (Erasmus University Rotterdam) Spinoza and the Collegiants Since the publication of Meinsma’s Spinoza en zijn kring it is considered a fact that Spinoza was friends with Collegiants such as Simon Joosten de Vries, Pieter Balling and Jarig Jelles. Fokke Akkerman and Piet Steenbakkers have subsequently shown how important Balling and Jelles were as editors and translators of Spinoza’s work, and that they helped him where they could, especially after he had been expelled.1 But when we look at their works our account may be brief: Pieter Balling’s Een Ligt from 1662 is, first and foremost, a very short text, which is, moreover, very vague; Jarig Jelles, whose 1684 confession shows some traces of Spinozism, is no less ambiguous; and the only really outspoken Spinozist among the Collegiants, Johannes Bredenburg from Rotterdam, did not want to become a Spinozist at all, and his ‘coming out’ was the cause of a long-lasting schism within the movement of the Collegiants. The brothers and sisters who took Bredenburg’s point of view mainly seem to have done so because they believed in the sincerity of Bredenburg’s struggle with Spinoza’s work.2 Moreover, so far it has never been made likely that Spinoza for his part was particularly open-minded towards the theology of the Collegiants – not least because the Collegiants did not have a clearly distinct theology. Collegiants were individualists, who often felt strongly attracted to spiritualistic and chiliastic varieties of reformed Christianity which were and remained essentially foreign to Spinoza. Nevertheless, this does not explain everything, for if one is searching for a theological impact one could overlook the fact that the Collegiants’ significance for Spinoza was not so much theological as political.3 Their impact would be felt not in Spinoza’s theology or metaphysics, but rather in his political theory. Before I try to explain this in further detail, I must first expressly state how much I owe to Frank Mertens’s and Siep Stuurman’s work as regards this insight.4 Briefly stated, I think Spinoza’s political theory and more in particular his preference for democracy was to a major degree prepared by the debate among Collegiants about what they called the ‘equality’ of believers. That debate first had a political connotation in the initiatives of the Collegiant Pieter Cornelis Plockhoy, who came from the 1 Akkerman, Studies in the Posthumous Works; Steenbakkers, Spinoza’s Ethica. 2 Van Bunge, Johannes Bredenburg (1643-1691). 3 This was first suggested by the Austrian professor of law Adolf Menzel in his debate with Willem Meijer. See Meijer, ‘Wie sich Spinoza zu den Collegianten verhielt’ and Menzel, ‘Spinoza und die Collegianten’. 4 Mertens: Franciscus van den Enden’s Brief Account; Stuurman, De uitvinding van de mensheid. 14 Wiep van BUNGE province of Zeeland. Subsequently it received a further secular turn in Franciscus van den Enden’s work. But first let me discuss the Collegiant movement. 1. Rijnsburger Collegiants The Collegiant movement came into existence at the beginning of the seventeenth century as a direct result of the Synod of Dordt, when resolute Arminians in and around Rijnburg decided they would no longer have their meetings conducted by a minister. For, they decided, rather than still be led by an – illicitly operating – Remonstrant minister, let alone by a Contra-Remonstrant, we will teach each other. The Van der Kodde brothers from then on organized church meetings on their own. In this context they invoked the early history of the Reformation and a number of texts from the New Testament. The fourteenth chapter of the first letter to the Corinthians was quoted in particular, for apparently Paul had, in his time, also told followers who had to do without a minister to go about it themselves. As soon as the brothers Van der Kodde had furnished a house for their meetings it was referred to as a ‘College’ and the participants as ‘Collegiants’. Their aim was mutual instruction, ‘not in the way of preaching or education, but by way of mutual research and study of the meaning of Holy Scripture’.5 ‘Colleges’ would be established in many places in the provinces of Holland and Friesland in the course of the seventeenth century, with Rijnsburg remaining the place where the Collegiants kept meeting each other twice a year.6 It was, among other things, unique to this movement that its adherents refused to draw up confessional writings or other ‘Formularies of Unity’. Believers were rather admonished to experience their faith on an individual basis. Thus, the colleges in Amsterdam and Rotterdam in particular turned into gathering places where the most daring forms of seventeenth-century Protestantism could flourish. Although they were, as a rule, mainly attended by Remonstrants and Mennonites, Socinians attended happily as well and a number of Spinoza’s best friends were also supposed to be Collegiants.7 Morover, many ‘Rijnsburgers’ turned out to be especially interested in chiliastic or millenarian speculation. During the 1680s Johannes Bredenburg’s sympathy for Spinoza’s philosophy resulted in a temporary schism within this national movement, which was, however, solved in 1700. During the eighteenth century the movement lost some of its 5 [Van Nimwegen], Historie der Rijnsburgsche Vergadering, 31. 6 Van Slee, De Rijnsburger Collegianten; Hylkema, Reformateurs; Lindeboom, Stiefkinderen van het Christendom; Kolakowski, Chrétiens sans Église, Chapters 2-4; Fix, Prophecy and Reason. 7 Kühler, Het socinianisme in Nederland; Meinsma, Spinoza en zijn kring. More recently: Knijff and Visser, Bibliographia Sociniana; Nadler, Spinoza. A Life. Van der Wall, De mystieke chiliast Petrus Serrarius. Spinoza and the Collegiants 15 energy, although it would still fulfil a star part in the sixth part (1736) of Bernard Picart’s famous Cérémonies et coutumes religieuses de tous les peuples du monde.9 Only around 1800 did the Rijnsburgers cease to exist as a movement. Definitely egalitarian tendences arose within this movement as early as around the middle of the seventeenth century. They were, first of all, the result of strong feelings of anti- clericalism. The aversion to the ‘lust for power’ of ministers was great and was continuously fed by numerous collisions with local ecclesiastical authorities. De Van der Kodde brothers had already told the ministers who had tried to keep the Rijnsburgers from their Alleingang that they had better ‘learn a good trade’.10 The Collegiant Johan Hartigveld from Rotterdam wrote in his Schriftuurlycke Waerdeering van het hedendaegsche Predicken (Scriptural Critique of Modern-day Preaching): ‘What else is the aim of the establishment of the Free Colleges and the Rijnsburg Meeting but to destroy by this establishment that dominating style of preaching?’11 The Mennonite poet Joachim Oudaen, a friend of Hartigveld’s, who is characterized by his biographer as a ‘herald of tolerance’, also went on the offensive soon as ministers with lust for power came into his view.12 There were just as many fierce controversies among Collegiants in Amsterdam about the question what authority ministers should have. The so-called ‘Lammerenkrijg’ erupted in the 1650s: various colleges flourished in Amsterdam as well and there, too, the meetings attracted Remonstrants, Mennonites, but also Quakers, Socinians, chiliasts and others. The behaviour of the Mennonite minister Galenus Abrahamsz in particular became the subject of lengthy controversies, but similar conflicts arose in Utrecht, Leiden and Haarlem. After the placard against Socinianism was made public in 1653 by the States of Holland, many local colleges fell into disrepute and struggles about Mennonite orthodoxy flared up everywhere in the Republic.13 The Collegiants’ ideas about equality were, in addition, inspired by a pacifism which seemed somewhat Mennonite. Hartigveld argued in De recht weerlooze Christen (The Truly Defenceless Christian) that no Christian should ever dominate others, neither his fellow citizens, nor his servants, wife or children. In his opinion there was only one sovereign, Christ himself, whose kingdom, as is well known, is not part of this world.14 It was also fit for a Christian to try and be humble and patient when faced with injustice, and Hartigveld, 9 Picart, Cérémonies et coutumes religieuses de tous les peuples du monde, VI, 327-333. See also Hunt, Jacob, Mijnhardt, The Book that Changed Europe, 129-130; Sadler, ‘The Collegiants’. 10 (De Fijne), Kort, Waerachtig, en Getrouw Verhael, 15. 11 (Hartigveld), Schriftuurlycke Waerdeering, 32. See for the attribution to Hartigveld: Sandius, Bibliotheca Anti-Trinitariorum, 161. 12 Melles, Joachim Oudaan. Cf. (Oudaen), Aanmerkingen over het Verhaal. 13 Meihuizen, Galenus Abrahamsz. 14 (Hartigveld), De recht weerlooze Christen, Chapter 1. Hartigveld died in 1678. This older text was published posthumously by his Rotterdam friends. See Hartog, ‘Een echte collegiant’. 16 Wiep van BUNGE the rich son of a mayor, put this into practice. He endowed the care for the poor with a large sum of money and consistently refused to be appointed in any government office. The Collegiant belief in equality was finally inspired by a strong feeling of human fallibility. The Rijnsburgers often quoted the work by the Remonstrant theologian Simon Episcopius, the author of the Remonstrant creed: ‘God has nowhere made known that there should always be a referee in the Church who speaks unerringly, neither did He point out who should always be this referee.’15 The roots of this Reformational realization of fallibility are old – Coornhert’s work in particular would remain popular among Collegiants for a long time.16 Proponents of Galenus regarded human fallibility especially as something that had become true in the context of the decline of the church.