Haemstede, Adkiaax van, one of the first preach-
IIAENDEL
14
HAFP^NER
CTS of the Keformoil faitli in the Netherlands, was prob- j aljly \x>n\ about tlie year 1525 in Schomven. 'i'he ijar- | cuts of Adriaan seem to have been among the earliest i in Zealand to embrace the Reformed faith. He under- stood several modern languages, and wrote in both Lat- : in and Duteh. His Dutch style is remarkable for per- j spicuity and strength. Adriaan was in lJo7 minister- i ing to "the Ifefomicd church in Antwerp, and his labors there were eminently successful. Deeply sympathizing with tiie i)crsecuted Protestants in France, he wrote in Latin a letter to Henry the Second of France, in which lie remonstrates with liim and pleads with him to ex- ercise clemency. Tliis letter is dated Dec. 1, 1557, and is thus in advance of the measures set on foot bj' Calvin and Ucza in behalf of these persecuted followers of Christ. Van Haeinstede in this letter suggests a con- icrence such as was held at Poissy in 1562. Van der Heidcn, sent at his request by the church at Emden to assist him at Antwerp, having arrived, he took occasion lo leave for a time (Feb. 15.58). During his absence dark clouds gathered, and soon after his return the storm biu-st. Van der Heidcn, whose place of preaching had been be- trayed Ijy a woman, escaped. A'an Haeinstede remain- ed, though a price was set upoa his head, and certain death awaited him if captured. His two faithful help- ers, Gillis and AnU>ine Verdikt, were lioth burned at Brus- sels. He left Antwerp probal)h' in IMarch, 1550, and .sought refuge in Ost Friesland. Subsequently he la- bored for a short time at Groningen, and was thence sent to England to take charge of a Reformed church in Ixnidon. He espoused the cause of the better class of Anabaptists, so far as to maintain tliat they should not Ik" ])unishcd for their doctrinal error rcsiici ting the hu- manity of Christ, since they acknowledged his divinity, and depended on him for salvation. This view was in direct conflict with the views and practice of Cranmer and Ridley, wlio had in 1551 condemned to the Hamcs .Toris \-an Parre, a Netherlander of irreproachable mor- als, simply on account of his doctrinal belief. As the church wliich Haemstedc s€n-c<l was at this time mider the suix!r\-ision of Edmund (Jrindal, bishop of London, he was called to account for his views, and, adhering to them, was banished from the kingdom. On his return to Holland he was deprived of all his property. Em- den, too, refused to receive him. He bore his trials and privations in a truly Ciuistian manner. At the earnest retjuest of many of the Ix)ndon congregation, he finally went thither again. The bishop of London demanded a recantation. He refused. Again he was banished. AVith a lieavy heart he returned to Frie.sland, where he soon after died. His death occurred in 15()2. In his views of religious lil)erty he was far in advance of his age, and fell a victim to the rci,'j,ning s))irit of intoler- ance. He was the author of the first Rook of Jlartyrs jjublishod in the Netherlands. It is conjectured that it was first published at Aniweqi during tlic persecution, and issu<'d in sheets as it was i)repare(l. The original edition, which is extremely rare, is in .small (piarto, l)earing the author's name, but not the i)lace of its pul)- lication. It met with great favor, and for two centuries it was the manual of tliousnnds, having jiassed through many siicces.sivc editions. See an al)le and interesting roonograpli of Rev. .Toh. ab I'lrecht Dresselhuis in the vith vol. of Kist and Rayaard's .1 rrhicf voor Kerkili'ikc O'fKr/iii-iUiiiji, iir,i>mhrl,(i(l run Ni'ilrrh'wd (Levd. 1835) ; (Jlasius. a<ul;,,-ktrd XKkrUiml, D. ii, (J. P.AV.)
HaendeL See Handicu
Haeretici. Sec Hkiuctk-.
Hceretico combiirendo, a writ which, in Eng- land,"anciently lay ngainsi a lurolic, who, having once been convicted of heresy by his bishop, and having ab- jured it, afler^vards falling into it again, or into some other, is tlu'reujion committed to the secular power. This writ is thought by some to be as ancient as the I common l.iw itself; however, the conviction of heresy t by the common law was not in any petty ecclesiastical i
court, but before the archbishop himself, in a provincial synod, and the delinquent was delivered up to the king, to do with him as he pleased; so that the crown had a control over the .spiritual power; but by 2 Henry IV, cap. 15, the diocesan alone, without the intervention of a synod, might convict of heretical tenets; and unless the convict abjured his opinions, or if, after abjuration, he relapsed, the sheriff was bound, ex officio, if required by the bi;>hop, to commit the unhap]n' victim lo the flames, without waiting for the consent of the crown. This writ remained in force, and was actually executed on two Anabaptists in the seventh of Elizabeth, and on two Arians in the ninth of James I. Sir Ivlward Coke was of opinion that this Vv-rit did not lie in his time; but it is now formally taken away by statute 29 Car. II, cap. 9. But this statute does not extend to take away or abridge the jurisdiction of Protestant archbishops, or bishops, or any other judges of any ecclesiastical courts, in cases of atheism, blasphemy, heresy, or schism; hut the\' may prove and punish the same, according to his majesty's ecclesiastical laws, by excommunication, dep- rivation, degradation, and other ecclesiastical censures, not extending to death, in such sort, and no other, as they might have done before the making of this act." — Buck, Theoloriical Dictionari/, s. v.