Multimedia Art Productions

Matthäus Merian – Topographia Hassiae (1646)

Introduction:

To better understand the world of Pastor Henricus Diepel’s descendants, we must return to 16th and 17th-century Haiger. His theological legacy in the local Stadtkirche set off a chain of religious and historical events. While the Reformation began in 1533 under the moderate teachings of Luther, the subsequent shift toward strict Calvinism around 1585 brought massive changes. This even led to the church's colorful medieval frescoes being buried under a thick layer of whitewash. This article dives into this turbulent transitional period to uncover how this religious struggle permanently shaped the daily lives of the Diepel family.

Historical Background:

In 1533, Pastor Henricus Diepel introduced the Reformation to the Stadtkirche of Haiger. His son Johannes Diepel followed in his footsteps; he was appointed as the second pastor of Haiger in 1561 and rose to become the first pastor there in 1581. Around 1588, the new Reformed faith led to the plastering over of the colorful medieval frescoes. Although this was intended to hide the images, the layer of plaster actually provided unique protection. This proved crucial during the disasters that followed. Between 1618 and 1648, the town was ravaged by the Thirty Years' War, famine, and the plague. Spanish troops caused a town fire in 1623, followed by an even greater catastrophe on May 8, 1723. This latter fire destroyed almost the entire town, claimed the lives of twelve residents and 600 head of cattle, and damaged the church roof. However, the frescoes survived the intense heat thanks to the centuries-old protective layer.

Henricus Dipel 1604

Johannes Dipel 1618

The enrollment as "Johannes Diepelius Hegeranus" is recorded in the official Matricula Facultatis Theologicae of the Academy of Herborn (Hohe Schule Herborn).

Johannes Diepelius Hegeranus

The Intermediate Generation and Enrollment (1618):

Between the founding patriarch and the later minister in Antwerp, the Diepel family maintained a constant position within the regional ecclesiastical landscape. A direct descendant, likewise registered under his Latinized name of origin, Johannes Haigeranus, enrolled at the Academy of Herborn (Academia Nassauensis) in the historic year of 1618. His enrollment coincided with the outbreak of the Thirty Years' War (1618–1648), a period that severely impacted the Nassau-Dillenburg region.

Ecclesiastical Career: After completing his theological training in Herborn around 1624/1625, Johannes Diepelius was admitted to the official register of ministers of the Classis of Nassau-Dillenburg. In doing so, he followed in the footsteps of his grandfather Henricus. Regional Pfarrerbücher (pastoral registers) show that he was active as a minister and pastor within the Amt of Haiger and the immediately surrounding Protestant congregations. Thanks to this generation, the theological influence and the family's connection to the Stadtkirche (town church) of Haiger continued unbroken during the turbulent first half of the 17th century.

Daniel Meisner Sciographia Cosmica (1624 Häyer Naßov)

In the small town of Haiger (Heyer), located an hour from Dillenburg, a severe fire broke out, as a result of which 250 houses, all the town gates, the church tower, etc., were reduced to ashes in little over an hour. Had the inhabitants not broken a hole in the graveyard wall and climbed through it, several hundred people would have tragically perished.

DE BRAND van Haiger 8 Mei 1723

🇩🇪

Dieweilen ein and anderer hießiger Stadt und Ampt Kirchen-Kinder nach Verlust der
Kirchen-Protocollen durch den entsetzlichen Brand 1723 den 8. Maii verlangt, dermahlen
Nachricht und Beweiß zu haben ihrer und der Ihrigen ehrlichen Geburt, obschon der
speciale Tag nicht mehr allemahlen zu wißen: So habe, waß wohl wißentlich, hierfolgendts
setzen wollen alß jetziger Pfarrer Johann Henrich Manger.

Met dank aan Sándor Krause en Ivo de Bruin

"Since several church children (parishioners) of this town and district, after the loss of the church protocols (registers) due to the horrific fire on May 8, 1723, currently desire to have information and proof of their and their relatives' legitimate birth — even though the exact day is no longer always known — I, Johann Henrich Manger, as the current pastor, have wanted to set down below what is well known."

🇩🇪 Sterbebuch Haiger

Bild 7, d.d. 1723
Rodenbach. † Johann Philipp, H[errn] Johann Jacob Diepels, Gerichtschöff[en] und Försters, Söhnch[en], gestorb[en] d[en] 10. Jun[ii], alt 10 Jahr.

Image 7, dated 1723
Historical context: This 1723 burial record highlights the high social standing of the Diepel family in the region. The honorary title "Herr" (Sir/Master) and Johann Jacob Diepel's roles as a court juror (Gerichtsschöffe) and local forester (Förster) demonstrate that he belonged to the local upper-class elite. Furthermore, 1723 was a tragic year for the community: just one month before this ten-year-old boy passed away, the catastrophic Great Fire of May 8, 1723, destroyed almost the entire town of Haiger. Because the neighboring village of Rodenbach was physically spared, this parish register survived the flames.

Rodenbach Kirche

Emergency Housing and the Demographic Spike in Rodenbach

While the town center lay in uninhabitable ruins, surrounding, spared villages such as Rodenbach served as the primary refuge for hundreds of suddenly homeless citizens. This acute overcrowding and the inevitable strain on living conditions left deep traces in the parish statistics.
Although the exact medical causes of death are missing from the records, the burial register (Beerdigungsregister) shows a striking, sharp spike in child mortality in the weeks directly following the fire. A tragic symbol of this can be found on page 'Bild 7': the death of 10-year-old Johann Philipp on June 10, 1723. He was the young son of Johann Jacob Diepels, who operated from Rodenbach as a magistrate (Gerichtsschöffe) and forester for the town of Haiger.


Crisis Management and Structural Reconstruction

The recovery of the region was tightly coordinated by the territorial and ecclesiastical authorities. Prince (Fürst) Christian of Nassau-Dillenburg (whose portrait has been preserved in the town hall of Herborn) immediately opened the princely grain stores and granted the victims tax exemptions lasting several years. In addition, he released large quantities of free timber from the surrounding forests—a logistical operation in which local foresters like Diepels formed the executive link.
The funding of public infrastructure, including the rapid repair of the heavily damaged Stadtkirche (town church) in December 1723, was made possible by large-scale church collections (Brandkollekten) at home and abroad, approved by the Consistory (Consistorium).
For long-term social and economic welfare, Princess (Fürstin) Isabella Charlotte of Nassau-Dillenburg (of whom a prominent state portrait as Flora is held in the Royal Collections in The Hague) showed great initiative. In 1735, she established the Isabellen-Stiftung (Isabella Foundation). This fund not only provided direct poverty relief to widows and orphans, but also functioned as a modern microcredit institution, allowing citizens to take out interest-free loans to permanently rebuild their livelihoods in Haiger and Rodenbach.

ISABELLA CHARLOTTE prinses van Nassau-Dietz Dochter van Hendrik Casimir II en Henriëtte Amalia van Anhalt-Dessau Leeuwarden 22 januari 1692 – Dillenburg 18 september 1757 Trouwt Oranienstein 15 april 1725 Christiaan vorst van Nassau-Dillenburg 1688-1739

🇩🇪
Bild 100, † 17 Nov 1740, Jost Diepels, 75 years old, married for 45 years, from which 4 sons and 2 daughters, of whom the two daughters and 1 son are still living. (See Antwerp baptisms below: the son Johannes Diepelius and the 2 daughters; A. C. Manderbachia née Diepelin & Anna Elisabetha Stichlin, née Diepelin)


1. The timeline and family structure match exactly

• Father Jost Diepels: Dies in 1740 (75 years old, born c. 1665). Marries around 1695.

• Son Johannes Diepelius: Enrolls in Leiden in 1735 as a 19-year-old (birth year 1716). This fits perfectly within Jost's marriage.

• The surviving son: In 1740, Jost leaves behind only one living son. Johannes is alive at that time and is 24 years old.

1. Aunt 1: Born Diepelin (married into the Manderbach family).

2. Aunt 2: Also born Diepelin.

Johanna Elisabeth den 7ten Junii 1724

🇩🇪

Heyger
Johann Claß Eychert und Anna Elisabeht, Ehel[eute], eine Tochter, den 7ten Junii 1724
gebohren und den 15ten dito getaufft. Tauff-Zeugen waren Jost Henrich, Andreas
Rudersdorffs ehel[icher] Sohn, und Anna Magdalena, Andreas Ströhmanns ehel[iche]
Tochter, ward genannt: Johanna Elisabeth.
Weil dieses Kind in Abwesenheit des weyl[and] Herrn Johan Henrich Mangers, gewesenen
ersten Predigers hieselbst, von deßen Herrn Sohn, ietzigen zweyten Prediger, getaufft, ist
solches einzuschreiben vergeßen, daher die Eltern mich Unterschriebenen gebeten, dieses
hieher zu setzen. Geschehen den 12ten Aug[usti] 1737 von
                                                                 Jousseaulme
                                          p[ro] t[empore] erster Prediger hieselbst

*Johann Henrich Mangar, prediger - hochfürstl[icher] Consistorial-Rath

Met dank aan Sándor Krause en Ivo de Bruin

🇬🇧
Haiger
Johann Claß Eychert and Anna Elisabeth, married couple, [had] a daughter, born on June 7, 1724, and baptized on the 15th of the same month. Godparents were Jost Henrich, legitimate son of Andreas Rudersdorff, and Anna Magdalena, legitimate daughter of Andreas Ströhmann. She was named: Johanna Elisabeth.
Because this child was baptized in the absence of the late Mr. Johann Henrich Manger, former first minister here, by his son, the current second minister, this entry was forgotten to be recorded. Therefore, the parents asked me, the undersigned, to insert this here. Done on August 12, 1737, by
Jousseaulme, currently first minister here.

I. Origins and Early Career of Johannes Diepelius (until 1742)

• Birth and Background: Johannes Diepelius was born around 1716 in Haiger, a strategic town within the Protestant County of Nassau-Dillenburg. He directly descended from an influential theological dynasty; his ancestor Henricus Diepel became the very first Protestant pastor (Pfarrer) of the local Stadtkirche after the Reformation in 1533.

• Preparatory Education in the Region (1728): In accordance with family tradition, he was enrolled at an early age at the Calvinist Academy of Herborn (Academia Nassauensis). According to the official Matrikel (the student register), he is listed in 1728 under his Latinized name of origin, Johannes Haigeranus. This institution served as the intellectual and theological cradle for the Nassau region.

• Academic Studies in Leiden (1735): To complete his theological studies, Diepelius migrated to the Dutch Republic (Republic of the Seven United Netherlands). On September 14, 1735, at the age of 19, he officially enrolled as a student of theology at the prestigious Leiden University (Album Studiosorum).

• Proponent and Assistant Minister (1738–1741): After successfully passing his academic examinations in Leiden, he returned to his native Nassau region. There, he took his ecclesiastical exams before the regional classis and obtained the formal status of Candidatus Ministerii (licentiate), granting him the authority to preach. In the subsequent years, he performed supporting ministerial duties and substituted for pastors within the Amt of Haiger and surrounding congregations. During these early years of practice, he operated within the established theological and administrative networks of his own family.

The enrollment as "Johannes Diepelius Hegeranus" is recorded in the official Matricula Facultatis Theologicae of the Academy of Herborn (Hohe Schule Herborn).

LEIDEN

ANTWERPEN

II. Call to the Antwerp Cross Congregation (1742)

• Ecclesiastical Context: In the early months of 1742, Diepelius received an official call (beroep) from the Republic to become a minister in the Southern Netherlands. He accepted the appointment to the Protestant Cross Congregation (Kruisgemeente) 'De Olijfberg' (The Mount of Olives) in Antwerp. At the time, the city was under the strict rule of the Catholic Austrian Habsburgs, meaning that the public practice of the Protestant faith was legally prohibited.

• Legal Status and Organization: Out of necessity, the community operated underground as a so-called 'Cross Congregation' (Kruisgemeente). The services could not display any outward characteristics of a church and took place in absolute secrecy in alternating private rooms or hidden back-alleys within the Antwerp city center.

• Size of the Congregation: According to surviving administrative records and reports submitted to the overarching ecclesiastical bodies in the North, Reverend Diepelius encountered a highly marginalized community upon his arrival in 1742. The active core consisted of only six permanent Protestant families (including the prominent Riemensnijder family) with a total of 26 confessing members, occasionally supplemented by passing Protestant merchants or travelers. Diepelius bore full spiritual and administrative responsibility here, under the constant threat of discovery by the local authorities.

ANTWERP – THE CONFLICT and the Marriage of Reverend Diepelius to his Cousin Johanne Elisabeth Eychert in 1751

The year 1751 was marked by a disciplinary crisis within the consistory surrounding Reverend Diepelius. The minister had fathered an illegitimate child with his cousin and housekeeper. Although the child was baptized after birth, its early death was subsequently kept a secret. After the situation escalated, the classis deputies placed the minister under ecclesiastical censure and imposed a phased penance trajectory.
Enforcing this measure met with internal difficulties. Consistory member Riemensnijder was morally compromised himself and carried little authority, which forced elder Johannes Daniel Dulcken to implement the disciplinary actions together with the deputies. To this end, Dulcken called upon the assistance of Reverend Anemaat from the border village of Ossendrecht. Together, they insisted on a marriage and agreed to a shortened period of censure.
During the synod in The Hague on August 10, 1751, Diepelius initially denied the allegations, but eventually confessed while expressing deep remorse. The censure was maintained, but peace was largely restored when Dulcken and Rev. Anemaat persuaded the couple to marry on August 22, 1751. This marriage was prominently documented on a full page in the church register. Their marital status and the subsequent birth of more children ensured that the matter was ultimately resolved amicably.


🇳🇱
EEN ONAANGENAAM MENSCH OP DEN OLIJFBERG.

*Dr J. B. du Buy DE GESCHIEDENIS VAN DEN BRABANDSCHEN OLIJFBERG Uitgegeven onder auspiciën van de VEREENIGING VOOR DE GESCHIEDENIS VAN HET BELGISCH PROTESTANTISME BRUSSEL - 1960

🇩🇪

Johanna Elisabeth den 7ten Junii 1724

Heyger
Johann Claß Eychert und Anna Elisabeht, Ehel[eute], eine Tochter, den 7ten Junii 1724
gebohren und den 15ten dito getaufft. Tauff-Zeugen waren Jost Henrich, Andreas
Rudersdorffs ehel[icher] Sohn, und Anna Magdalena, Andreas Ströhmanns ehel[iche]
Tochter, ward genannt: Johanna Elisabeth.
Weil dieses Kind in Abwesenheit des weyl[and] Herrn Johan Henrich Mangers, gewesenen
ersten Predigers hieselbst, von deßen Herrn Sohn, ietzigen zweyten Prediger, getaufft, ist
solches einzuschreiben vergeßen, daher die Eltern mich Unterschriebenen gebeten, dieses
hieher zu setzen. Geschehen den 12ten Aug[usti] 1737 von
                                                                 Jousseaulme
                                          p[ro] t[empore] erster Prediger hieselbst

*Johann Henrich Mangar, prediger - hochfürstl[icher] Consistorial-Rath

Met dank aan Sándor Krause en Ivo de Bruin

🇬🇧
Haiger
Johann Claß Eychert and Anna Elisabeth, married couple, [had] a daughter, born on June 7, 1724, and baptized on the 15th of the same month. Godparents were Jost Henrich, legitimate son of Andreas Rudersdorff, and Anna Magdalena, legitimate daughter of Andreas Ströhmann. She was named: Johanna Elisabeth.
Because this child was baptized in the absence of the late Mr. Johann Henrich Manger, former first minister here, by his son, the current second minister, this entry was forgotten to be recorded. Therefore, the parents asked me, the undersigned, to insert this here. Done on August 12, 1737, by
Jousseaulme, currently first minister here.

The Pressure from Elder Dulcken and the Suspension

When the belly of his cousin JOHANNA ELISABETH began to grow, Diepelius initially denied the allegations in every possible way. As Johannes Lodewijk Dulcken (the son of the famous harpsichord maker Johan Daniel Dulcken) writes in his letters:
"You must imagine how insulting and shameful this has been for all of us: after his wife had passed away, he seduced and impregnated a young girl—his own cousin, who had been entrusted to his spiritual care as a minister. Not only did he deny this to my father under the most sacred oaths, but to make his lie believable, he also forced the woman to appear in church barely six or seven days after giving birth to be blessed. This happened at the peril of her own life. Shortly thereafter, he sent her away to Holland."
The street urchins in Antwerp shouted after the Protestant churchgoers in the streets at the time: "Your horny pastor has made a child!"
Elder Johan Daniel Dulcken absolutely refused to tolerate this disgrace, which directly jeopardized the survival of the small, tolerated Protestant community in Catholic Antwerp. He brought the matter before the Deputies (the supervising ecclesiastical body). The Deputies intervened harshly and suspended Reverend Diepelius from his office. Only when the pressure became untenable and Dulcken continued to demand that order be restored did Diepelius yield and reluctantly marry his cousin.

🇳🇱

COMPLETE

🇳🇱
1751. Den 23 Augústús in ondertrou opgenomen
Den Eerw: Heer Johannes Diepeliús
J: M: geboren te Heijger int Nassaú
Dillenbúrgse, bedienaar des godde=
lijken woords in de Krúisgemeente
te Antwerpen.
met
Júffw. Johanna Elizabet Eichartin
zijne Nigte J: D: ook aldaar
geboren, en woonagtig te Ant=
werpe voor het tegenwoordige.
Desen ondertroú is geschiet in te=
genwoordigheyt van den Heer
Ouderling Johan Daniel Dülken.
(Onderste gedeelte, de bevestiging van het huwelijk:)
ick ondergeschrevene predikant te pútte, getúige
by desen heden den 5 September in den Húwelijke
Staat bevestigt te hebben de Weleerw: Heer
Johannes Dipeliús J: M: geboren te Heijger
in 't Nassau Dillenbúrgse, Bedienaar des
Goddeleijken woords in de Krúisgemeente te
Antwerpen
Met
Júffroúw Johanna Elisabet Eeichartin j: D:
oock aldaar geboren en wonende te Antwerpen
Antwerpen Den 5 September 1751
Nicolaús janssen
predicant te Pútte

23 augustus 1751
In ondertrouw opgenomen:
De eerwaarde heer Johannes Diepelius, vrijgezel, geboren te Haiger in het graafschap Nassau-Dillenburg, predikant van de Kruisgemeente te Antwerpen,
met
juffrouw Johanna Elizabet Eichart, zijn nicht, ongehuwde echtgenote-in-spe, eveneens aldaar geboren en vooralsnog woonachtig te Antwerpen.
Deze ondertrouw heeft plaatsgevonden in aanwezigheid van de heer ouderling Johan Daniel Dülken.
(Bevestiging van het huwelijk onderaan:)
Ik, ondergetekende predikant te Putte, getuig bij dezen dat ik heden op 5 september in de echt heb verbonden: de weledele eerwaarde heer Johannes Diepelius, vrijgezel, geboren te Haiger in Nassau-Dillenburg, predikant van de Kruisgemeente te Antwerpen,
met
juffrouw Johanna Elisabet Reichart (Eichart), ongehuwd, eveneens aldaar geboren en wonende te Antwerpen.
Antwerpen, 5 september 1751
Nicolaus Janssen
Predikant te Putte


1751. On August 23rd, recorded for the banns of marriage:
The Reverend Gentleman Johannes Diepelius, J: M: [bachelor], born at Haiger in the Nassau-Dillenburg region, minister of the Divine Word in the Cross Congregation at Antwerp,
with
Miss Johanna Elizabet Eichartin, his cousin, J: D: [spinster], also born there, and residing at Antwerp for the present.
This recording of the banns took place in the presence of the Gentleman Elder Johan Daniel Dülken.
(Lower section, the confirmation of the marriage:)
I, the undersigned minister at Putte, testify hereby to have confirmed today, September 5th, in the state of marriage: the Right Reverend Gentleman Johannes Dipelius, J: M:, born at Haiger in the Nassau-Dillenburg region, Minister of the Divine Word in the Cross Congregation at Antwerp,
with
Miss Johanna Elisabet Eeichartin, J: D:, also born there and residing at Antwerp.
Antwerp, September 5th, 1751
Nicolaús Janssen
Minister at Putte

2. Modernized Version

August 23, 1751 – Registration of the Marriage Banns:
The reverend gentleman Johannes Diepelius, bachelor, born in Haiger in the county of Nassau-Dillenburg, minister of the Cross Congregation in Antwerp,
with
miss Johanna Elizabet Eichart, his cousin, unmarried woman, likewise born there and currently residing in Antwerp.
This registration took place in the presence of elder Johan Daniel Dülken.
(Confirmation of the marriage below:)
I, the undersigned minister at Putte, hereby testify that on this day, September 5, I have joined in holy matrimony: the right reverend gentleman Johannes Diepelius, bachelor, born in Haiger in Nassau-Dillenburg, minister of the Cross Congregation in Antwerp,
with
miss Johanna Elisabet Eichart, unmarried, likewise born there and residing in Antwerp.
Antwerp, September 5, 1751
Nicolaus Janssen
Minister at Putte

🇳🇱

1. De Eerste Doop: Het kind van het schandaal (15 juni 1752)
1752. Den 15 Junij is Gedoopt het Soonje van Johannes Diepelius, en
Johanna Elisabeth Eichart huijs-vrouw, en genaamd Johannes Henricus.
Doopgetuijge zijn gewest d'Heer Eichart, mijner vrouwen Vader, en
d'Heer Jean Henricus Steen, Keijsl: Koopman van Herloo,
met de Juffrouw A. C. Manderbachia geboorne Diepelin. Maar
dit Soonje is gestorven den 6. Aug. 1752 om 7 uuren 's morgens.

De naam van de vader Eichart: De opa van het kind reist (of stuurt een volmacht) naar Antwerpen. Er staat letterlijk: "d'Heer Eichart, mijner vrouwen Vader". De vader van de bruid heette dus ook Eichart.
De Tante Dippel geïdentificeerd: De vrouwelijke getuige is "Juffrouw A. C. Manderbachia geboorne Diepelin". 'Diepelin' is de vrouwelijke vorm van Dippel! I Zij was getrouwd met een meneer Manderbach (gelatiniseerd tot Manderbachius).
Tragedie: Het kind stierf nog geen twee maanden later, op 6 augustus 1752.

🇳🇱
2. De Tweede Doop: (16 juli 1753)

1753. Den 16 Julij is gedoopt een dogterte van Johannes Diepelius
en zijner huijsvrouw, en genaamd Elizabetha (ge-
booren zijnde den 15 Julij 's ogents tusschen 6 en 7 uuren). Doopgetuijgen
gewest Heer Pijl, Ouderling van deese gemeente, uijt Middelburg
als Volmachtiger voor, en Anna Elisabetha Stichlin, geboorne Diepelin
en Anna Elisabetha Eichartin, voorneemlijck tot Heijger.

• NB. mort = → Nota Bene, mortua est (Let wel, overleden)

• A.no 21.mo Maii 1755. → Anno 21mo Maii 1755 (In het jaar 1755, op de 21e mei)
• v. matutino temp:re → vel matutino tempore (ofwel in de ochtendstond / 's morgens)
• inre loram → in re relatam (zoals gerapporteerd / meegedeeld)
• g ab domesticis → gegeven/gemeld door de huisgenoten

Het kindje dat op 26 juli 1753 werd gedoopt, is dus helaas nog geen twee jaar later (op 21 mei 1755) 's morgens overleden.

🇳🇱

3. De Derde Doop: (12 juni 1757)
1757. Den 12 Junij 1757 is Gedoopt het dogterje van Johannes diepelius,
en genaamt Johanna Martina: doopgetuijgen zijn geweest d'Heer
Heer Johannes Lodovicus Held en diezelve Huijsvrouwe Johanna Gledin,
respective predikant tot Niewvliet in Zeeland, en Marthina Boms,
diacon van deese gemeijnde; geboren omtrent 12 uuren des morgens heel vroegh
op den 10 hijer namens; pro memoria.

HAIGER - Trauregister - Taufregister - Beerdigungsregister

COMPLETE

Mijn moeder ( Susanne Maria Knöpffel) heeft vaak met betraande oogen geklaagd hoe zij de dominee moest laten zoeken toen mijn vader op sterven lag. Toen hij uiteindelijk in een herberg buiten de stad werd gevonden, was hij door dronkenschap niet eens meer in staat om met mijn vader te bidden. Recent nog heeft hij zich in een herberg zó vreselijk bedronken dat hij zich tijdens het wildplassen zo schandelijk en onbeschaamd heeft gedragen, dat er katholieke buurtbewoners naar ons toe kwamen. Zij vroegen ons hem te waarschuwen en te zeggen dat hij zich in het vervolg moet inhouden en zich niet meer als een beest moet gedragen; anders zouden ze zijn geslachtsdeel eraf snijden, enzovoort. Zijn levenswandel is in het algemeen zo schandalig dat hij het leven voor ons hier (voor zover dat nog mogelijk is) ondragelijk maakt. Er is hier werkelijk geen enkel gezin dat niet onder hem lijdt. Het gevolg hiervan is dat men hem niet langer waardig acht voor zijn ambt en de mensen wegblijven uit zijn diensten. De armen schieten hierdoor tekort en wij worden beroofd van het kostbare woord van God, omdat we van zo'n pastoor simpelweg niets moeten hebben. Hij staat daardoor voor lege stoelen en banken te preken, tenzij er eens vreemdelingen komen kijken. Ik heb zelf twintig jaar in Holland gewoond en ben hier vorig jaar vanwege mijn zaken naartoe gekomen, met de bedoeling om hier uiteindelijk met mijn gezin te gaan wonen. Voor mijn werk gebruik ik knechten. Zij gingen, samen met mijn zoontje, altijd trouw naar de kerk. Maar de dominee vond het afgelopen donderdag — op Hemelvaartsdag — nodig om een van hen, Lodewijk Ruijs (een jongen uit een fatsoenlijke familie en van goed gedrag), openlijk tijdens de volle kerkdienst op een buitensporige manier te beledigen. [Pagina 3] Om de situatie goed te begrijpen, moet ik vooraf vertellen dat de dominee een dochter heeft van ongeveer 17 jaar. De genoemde Lodewijk Ruijs is een landgenoot van hem en kwam daardoor vaak bij hen over de vloer. Hierdoor kreeg hij contact met het meisje. Dat ging zelfs zo ver dat zij hem zes brieven heeft geschreven, waarin zij hem in de tederste bewoordingen en met dure eden trouw beloofde. Toen deze Ruijs echter merkte dat haar vader hier fel op tegen was, heeft hij meteen bij het eerste verzoek de brieven aan de dominee overhandigd om ze te laten verbranden. Hij heeft er toen volledig afstand van genomen. Vindt u dat niet juist heel edelmoedig en dankenswaardig van hem? Maar in plaats van dankbaarheid te tonen, wenkte de dominee die man [Lodewijk Ruijs] vlak voor de preek. Hij zei hardop: "Sta op, ga achteraan zitten!" Ongetwijfeld omdat zijn dochter het niet kon verdragen om hem te zien. Hierop antwoordde mijn knecht: "Waarom dat? Ben ik soms niet net zo eerlijk als de rest?" Waarop de dominee reageerde met: "Nee!" De knecht verliet daarop beschaamd en ontdaan de kerk, maar voegde de dominee nog toe: "Dan zal ik eens kijken wat mij te doen staat." U zult wel begrijpen dat deze jongeman de zaak hier niet bij kan laten zitten zonder dat hij eerherstel en excuses krijgt. Daarom heb ik de vrijheid genomen om mij namens hem tot u te wenden, met het dringende en nederige verzoek om hem snel recht te doen. Zo hoeven we hier geen rechtszaak bij het stadhuis van te maken. Hij is hier anders namelijk niet van te weerhouden, want een goede naam is een mens het liefste bezit, direct na het leven zelf. Ik vond het nu nog niet nodig om officiële, beëdigde getuigenverklaringen te verzamelen. Aan de ene kant om onze felle tegenstanders, de katholieken, geen reden te geven om ons uit te lachen en zich te verkneukelen, (zie ommezijde) [Pagina 4] en aan de andere kant omdat ik niet geloof dat de dominee de brutaliteit zal hebben om te ontkennen wat in het openbaar is gebeurd. In de verwachting dat u snel orde op zaken zult stellen in deze kwestie, heb ik de eer te verblijven met verschuldigde eerbied, Weleerwaarde heren, Uw zeer nederige dienaar, J. L. Dülcken Antwerpen, 16 mei 1774.



[Letter from J. L. Dülcken – Antwerp, May 16, 1774]
My mother (Susanne Maria Knöpffel) has often lamented with tearful eyes how she had to have the minister searched for while my father lay dying. When he was finally found in a tavern outside the city, he was so intoxicated that he was not even capable of praying with my father. Just recently, he got so terribly drunk in a tavern that while urinating in public, he behaved so scandalously and shamelessly that Catholic residents from the neighborhood came to us. They asked us to warn him and tell him to restrain himself in the future and stop acting like a beast; otherwise, they would cut off his private parts, and so forth.
His conduct in general is so scandalous that he makes life here (insofar as that is still possible) unbearable for us. There is truly not a single family here that does not suffer because of him. The consequence of this is that people no longer deem him worthy of his office, and the congregation stays away from his services. Because of this, the poor are neglected, and we are deprived of the precious word of God, simply because we want nothing to do with such a pastor. As a result, he is preaching to empty chairs and benches, unless strangers happen to come and look.
I myself lived in Holland for twenty years and came here last year because of my business, with the intention of eventually bringing my family to live here. For my work, I employ servants. They, along with my young son, always faithfully attended church. But last Thursday — on Ascension Day — the minister found it necessary to openly and outrageously insult one of them, Lodewijk Ruijs (a youth from a respectable family and of good conduct), in the middle of a full church service.
[Page 3]
In order to properly understand the situation, I must first explain that the minister has a daughter of about 17 years old. The aforementioned Lodewijk Ruijs is a compatriot of his and therefore often visited their home. Through this, he came into contact with the girl. This went so far that she wrote him six letters, in which she promised him her fidelity in the tenderest terms and with solemn oaths.
However, when this Ruijs noticed that her father was fiercely opposed to this, he immediately handed the letters over to the minister upon the very first request to have them burned. He then completely distanced himself from her. Do you not find that very noble and commendable of him?
But instead of showing gratitude, the minister beckoned that man [Lodewijk Ruijs] just before the sermon. He said aloud: "Stand up, go sit in the back!" Undoubtedly because his daughter could not bear the sight of him. To this, my servant replied: "Why is that? Am I not just as honorable as the rest?" To which the minister responded: "No!" The servant then left the church, ashamed and distraught, but added to the minister: "Then I shall see what I have to do."
You will understand that this young man cannot let this matter rest without receiving rehabilitation and an apology. Therefore, I have taken the liberty to address you on his behalf, with the urgent and humble request to do him swift justice. This way, we will not have to turn this into a lawsuit at the town hall. Otherwise, he cannot be restrained from doing so, for a good name is a man's dearest possession, second only to life itself.
I did not think it necessary just yet to gather official, sworn witness statements. On the one hand, so as not to give our fierce adversaries, the Catholics, a reason to mock us and gloat,
(see reverse side)
[Page 4]
and on the other hand, because I do not believe the minister will have the audacity to deny what occurred so openly in public.
Expecting that you will swiftly restore order in this matter, I have the honor to remain with due reverence,
Right Reverend Gentlemen,
Your very humble servant,
J. L. Dülcken
Antwerp, May 16, 1774.



Under a Diplomatic Veil: Reformed Church Services and Protestant Survival in Brussels (1764–August 1769)

Between 1764 and 1769, the legation of the Republic of the United Netherlands in Brussels served as the sole formal refuge for Protestants in the Southern Netherlands. Under the strictly Catholic Austrian regime, public non-Catholic worship and Protestant funerals were strictly prohibited by law. By making clever use of diplomatic immunity, the Dutch diplomatic mission managed to sustain a vital underground house church community. A reconstruction of a turbulent period in which church services were forced to relocate amid fires and bankruptcies, and in which the community had to provide its dead with a dignified resting place through a unique, pragmatic alliance with a Catholic monastic order.

The Rotating Pulpit: Ministers and the Regional Network

The spiritual continuity of the Brussels embassy community depended on a precarious succession of ministers appointed by the States General in The Hague. Following a rapid succession of changes after 1749 — including the brief tenures of Reverend Fournier and Reverend Anosi (from Chur) — the period between 1764 and 1776 was characterised by a complex network of pastoral care:

• The interim ministry of Johannes Dipelius (1758–1763): Following the death of Reverend Anosi, the pulpit in Brussels remained vacant. During these critical years, Johannes Dipelius, the resident minister of Antwerp, travelled regularly to Brussels to conduct services and shepherd the vulnerable flock.

• The ministry of Daniël Fehr (1763–1771): On 24 May 1763, the States-General officially called Daniël Fehr to the post. He took charge just before the disastrous year of 1764 and remained the central figure until his departure in 1771.

Baptisms at the Protestant Church in Brussels:

Johannes Diepelius Hegeranus



Brief 4 September 1754
Brief 8 Maart 1775