Disputatie tusschen twie huysluyden ghevallen tot Jan Thuenessen, in de Oude-Bruch-Steech, over het wech-...

Nevertheless, I have indeed heard that he promised the servants in Rijp a village in North Holland not to leave without their consent.

Yes, friend, that is true, but he did that after he had already set things in motion in Serdam Zaandam. It seems to me, to my simple understanding, that Pieter Pietersen made great mistakes there. First, it was shamefully handled against Jan Willemsen, that he dealt him such a great blow and undermined his position so. Second, it was great duplicity that he first attached himself to those of Serdam, and after that (when he had set the Serdammers in motion) he bound himself again to the servants of Rijp, that he would not leave without their consent, and that to such people who he well knew would not grant it: what do you think, is that handled honestly?

Yes, dear friend, Pieter is a good servant, he does not know better. It all stems from the best intentions, as you heard Hans de Rijp also say (when he spoke of Pieter’s booklet for the Brethren). Pieter, he said, has made the booklet with good intentions; I believe that firmly. Hear what concerns Pieter’s departure: it has been told to me that the servants of the Rijp had already convinced Pieter to stay, over all others with those of Serdam. But then Jan Willemsen wrote a shameful letter to Pieter Dantelsen, so ugly, that he painted Pieter Pietersen in it as if he were the devil himself. When our Pieter heard that, he did not want to stay any longer with them.

Yes, friend, saying is no proof. Dear, tell me, did Jan mention Pieter’s name or thought in the letter? Oh, dear, let us hear the evidence: wherein does he paint Pieter so ugly?

Oh, evidence indeed! How ignorant can he pretend to be, as if he knew nothing of it: Jan had, in the peace presentation that he sent to Pieter Dantelsen, included or brought to bear a history that Erasmus mentions in his book On the Tongue original: "Van de Tonge" (Fol. 101). It is about a hypocrite, or rogue, who made great discord between two Bishops, and so stirred things up in order to become Bishop himself (if that was the aim of his service). Jan Willemsen also thought that there was a path between Pieter Dantelsen and him. Pieter Pietersen took this terribly to heart and took it as if Jan Willemsen meant that he was that troublemaker. Then he hitched himself again to those of Serdam. He would have changed that again and let himself be convinced, had Jan reached his service. Now his cousin also came in the meantime to help Serdam—who must be with them, otherwise it would have looked better: what do you think, was Jan Willemsen not the cause of his departure?

Well, what a miserable argument is that? Oh, dear, hear the evidence: Jan, you say, steals because there were one or more troublemakers between him and Pieter Dantelsen. Pieter Pietersen took this upon himself as if he were the man. Ergo therefore, Jan is the cause of Pieter’s departure? Oh, dear brother's heart, it is something else entirely that you know: one says commonly, he who is not a whore does not take offense. If Pieter is as innocent as some think, why does he take it more to heart than another?

How is it then not the case that Pieter Pietersen is a slanderer, and by so doing makes trouble?

Why it is so, I know well. I always say as before: the innocent need not take it to heart. Also, Pieter’s clap-happy tongue is so well known that even some of his own peace-city citizens say that Pieter has had that defect for some time. But, they say again, Pieter means no malice with it, Pieter means it as a good, honest servant.

Those are lies; I have not yet heard that he is convicted of that.

Yes, friend, to call each other liars, that is no art. I mean, if Pieter had Jan Thuenessen before his eyes, as he is behind his back, Pieter’s defects would have come to light much better. But now he plays with Jan Thuenessen as he does with many others before their eyes, but behind their backs he paints him as ugly as the devil himself.

But it stands fast, and is well known, that Jan Thuenessen attacked Pieter when he brought Hans de Rijp, but Jan Thuenessen does that at the favor of Mittert Obbijssen, because Hans and others have rejected Mittert and set him out of his service. That has Pieter Pietersen not done; he is so sweet, gives Mittert good words, and is friendly to him.

Oh, dear servant, how do you still sleep in your cap idiomatic: how are you still so naive? Pieter indeed gives him fine words and knows how to act as if he means it, but behind his back he says otherwise. He says that Mittert’s understanding is not to be trusted, yes, that he sins against the Holy Spirit, and so he tears Mittert down more than all the others.

Hola, men, hola! Your question is running quite high. It seems to me that you cannot well agree. I thought that it was now entirely decided upon the Splant the matter at hand between Pieter, and Jan Willemsen, and Pieter Dantelse, and not all of you. Is there still such difference? That does not sound well.

Do you think that strange? Jan, give ear to the cause!

How so, where does this return to?

Jan Willemsen has not wanted to let Pieter do any preaching when he was to leave.

Softly, friend, softly! Who knows if it is true? Who has asked Jan, who has refused it?

Pieter Pietersen has asked it himself, as he has told me, and told many people, friend; Jan has refused it to him.

That is not true, but I know well that Pieter has made the people believe it so. But when we asked Jan, he said to us that it was not true. Even so, Pieter Pietersen has already made some people restless here, who know how to set their streets to schism and division, and stayed away from Jan’s preaching: and that mostly from the peace-city’s own citizens.

Would you then say that Pieter has lied?

That would not be the first time, and it would have appeared all too clearly, had Jan Willemsen wanted to answer him in the first accusation. For Pieter Pietersen wrote to Hans de Rijp that the servants had stiffly forbidden Jan from letting the booklet go out—I have heard myself that that is not true. After that, he said that Jan Willemsen would not forgive him his misdeed; that was also not true. Fourthly, that he had requested to speak with Jan, and that Jan would not stand to answer him; that was also not true, for Jan presented himself as willing to speak with Pieter, but Pieter himself did not want to, as we can prove with witnesses.

It seems with you it is always Pieter’s fault. But our servants gave me to understand that it was no good thing, and that it was Jan’s fault, just as Uncle Jaap complained of Jan to Hans de Rijp, that Jan would not let Pieter do any preaching.

Jan Willemsen denies such, and it has also appeared otherwise in the settlement. But what shall I say? The servants, most of them, would wish that Jan were gone. They cannot have any peace with Jan. Jan is far too clever for them, they say. But I thought that Jan wants to hold himself too firmly to God’s Word, and does not want to follow their desires, opinions, or hard heads, and so they give it the name that Jan is too clever, that one cannot have any peace with him.

What have they blamed Jan for at the last, that was against God’s Word? I think that you cannot name one point with which they have hoped to turn things otherwise.

Oh, dear friend, all softly; they are all men like any other. It is their desire that they would want to be in Jan’s place, or be given high regard in one thing, for Jan Willemsen has long since requested that they should change some of their servants, and put some others in their place, as others do, so that those people could help bear the burden. But what haste they have; it is impossible; that is the cause that they are so partial against Jan.

Nevertheless, I have heard tell that they would indeed like to be released from their service, but Claas Jacobsen, he is not satisfied with that.

Well, Jan Thuenessen, what do you think? Does it fit well that Claas Jacobsen, who is himself a servant, and two of his brothers-in-law, and also one his uncle, and also one his nephew, do not want to consent to it? It seems to me, however much I am a simple man, that no one less fits to oppose such things than him. What do you think?

It fits no one less. But that sounds strange in my ears, that all your servants are, save one, blood relations. Then they have a good reason to keep the stirrup on their side. But, men, I must still say something under confidence: if such servants meant only that they did not play the peace-disturber, they would soon be able to come to that to be released. What they should say, men, there it lies: "We desire to be released," who could force them?

No, man, such advisors we get every day. We are well satisfied with our servants; if you have nothing else to say, you may as well be silent.

I know still more. They have, in my opinion, not behaved well toward Jan, that they have spent a hundred and sixty guilders on the printer to print Jan Willemsen’s book, and when the purchase was made, then the printer changed his mind and left Jan Willemsen in the pickle. And now that Jan has met their bad luck so much that he has cleared it himself, now they do not want to give him a penny. What do you think, is that handled well?

No, it is handled shamefully (with permission, men, that I interfere in your speech). It has been told to me that they first requested of Jan Willemsen that he should merely consent in silence that they might print his book, and when Jan Willemsen, through long request for the sake of peace, had agreed to this, so they requested further that Jan Willemsen must give full consent. When that was done, then Jan had to give it by his own writing. When they had that, then it became a different story: either Jan must permit that one could burn his book in the house, and as Jan did not want to allow that, it remained stuck. Then Pieter and Claas Jacobsen went off to Amsterdam, without Jan’s knowledge, and said that they had Jan Willemsen’s full commission to be allowed to print his book, which the printer believed, though it was a lie, and agreed with them. After that, they shipped it out again and caused Jan Willemsen such costs that he had to pay it himself. And when he had paid it all, then they thought to set him out of his service. Such shameful handling, is that the work of honest people? It may be that I do not want to say.

So much that concerns that, I leave them to answer for themselves. Those matters have all been left and settled between Jan Willemsen and them. They have also confessed their fault against Jan (as it is said) that they have not behaved themselves as good servants alongside Jan Willemsen, and now they have promised to keep an honest house with him.

Yes, dear friend, so honest that it is a shame. There they are who, since Jan has seen the peace, have not yet given one good word on the matter. And as soon as Hans de Rijp had moved away, and the peace was said to be made, our servant came on the third day already and requested of Jan Willemsen that he should stand down from the oversight or care of the servants of the Word, and this they wanted to have that...