Skip to main content

"Anti-Menno" Communist: David J. Penner (1904-1993)

The most outspoken early “Mennonite communist”—or better, “Anti-Menno” communist—was David Johann Penner, b. 1904.

Penner was the son of a Chortitza teacher and had grown up Mennonite Brethren in Millerovo, with five religious services per week (note 1)! In 1930 with Stalin firmly in power, Penner pseudonymously penned the booklet entitled Anti-Menno (note 2). While his attack was bitter, his criticisms offer a well-informed, plausible window on Mennonite life—albeit biased and with no intention for reform. He is a ethnic Mennonite writing to other Mennonites.

  • Penner offers multiple examples of how the Mennonite clergy in particular—but also deacons, choir conductors, Sunday School teachers, leaders of youth or women’s circles—aligned themselves with the exploitative interests of industry and wealth.
  • Extreme prosperity for Mennonite industrialists and large landowners was achieved with low wages and the poverty of their Russian /Ukrainian workers, according to Penner.
  • Though they taught non-resistance, Mennonite industrialists employed Cossacks to keep order and put down strikes with whips and sable.
  • Landless or land-poor Mennonites were also exploited; they paid taxes, but had no vote in village affairs and the distribution of land.
  • In his experience Mennonite leadership did not speak against exploitation or give voice to the poor, and failed miserably to erect any safeguards to limit the influence of the wealthy upon the life of the church.
  • Years of Sunday School and religious instruction in the schools and home, enhanced by Christian music and singing groups, gave youth eyes for overseas mission and charity work, but no tools to address social inequality in their own backyard or for political activism, he argued.
  • In the villages all Mennonite thought and action was saturated by religion, which ultimately stifled critical intellectual and cultural life. Religion class dominated the schools at the expense of other academic subjects.
  • Ministers and teachers were restrictive cultural gatekeepers; literature in the bookstores was largely German and religious.
  • Contact with the larger world was controlled and limited through boards of clergy who spoke to government for Mennonites as a whole, and through elected administrators, industrialists and traders. Lower and middle-class Mennonites were wholly dependent: by and large they spoke little Russian, and the women almost none.
  • The Mennonite commonwealth was achieved and reinforced by an attitude that looked down on Russians and Ukrainians as a lower type of people.
  • Mennonite leadership displayed uncritical patriotism towards the Tsarist regime in church, school and the press, which served to uphold the system of privileges.
  • For both the clergy and the capitalists, the Mennonite state-within-a-state was a “Mennonite heaven” even as the wealthy profited from grain speculation and the production of munitions for the Tsarist regime throughout World War I.
  • In 1918 Mennonites aligned themselves with the German occupying force and instigated ten revenge executions, according to Penner.
  • Support for the Mennonite Selbstschutz (self-defence units) preceded the Makhno anarchy and was particularly strong amongst the faculty (e.g., Benjamin Unruh) of the advanced, elite schools in Halbstadt and Ohrloff and its well-to-do students (see note 3).

Penner’s hostile critique of Mennonite life and culture delivered 13 years after the Russian Revolution was from a particular vantage point and commitment to reading history from a Marxist historical-materialist worldview. Penner expected the community to collapse because of its own internal contradictions, like capitalist systems on a macro level.

Penner’s attack is vitriolic, but important to understand from beginning to end. He offers more than a little correction to the dominant portrayal of a Mennonite “golden age” in Russia pre-1914, and helps in part to explain how it was that members of an historic peace church—the wealthy as well as the village-poor—could take up arms, and why some Mennonites chose to become communists.

Penner published another volume on Mennonites together with ethnic Mennonite Heinrich Friesen in 1930, and in 1931, translated as: Under the Yoke of Religion: German Colonists of the USSR and their Religious Organizations. Penner and Friesen justified the anarchist Makhno atrocities, claiming that they were provoked by the national agitation of religious leaders, above all the Mennonites. The authors warn of “left-wing sects” and charge the Mennonite ministerial as a whole of counter-revolutionary activity, for organizing desertion and sabotage in the Red Army and agricultural labour crews, and for leading a “peaceful” battle against Soviet powers through their cooperatives (note 4).

As a one-time insider, Penner affirmed that religious faith was more firmly anchored amongst the Mennonite masses than the Orthodox faith was amongst average Russians. He understood that because Mennonite life was a cohesive whole, Mennonite leadership in 1920s instinctively--if wrongly--sought to dominate the economic, cultural, religious and political life of their districts. As such, however, they created “innumerable obstacles” for the work of the party and for the labourer or poor to organize politically in the work of the soviet reconstruction (note 5). And consequently, as more recent Soviet archival documents show, Mennonites as Mennonites were singled out for harsher treatment by government agencies.

             ---Arnold Neufeldt-Fast


---Notes---

Note 1: Cf. Peter Letkemann, “David Johann Penner [A. Reinmarus]: A Mennonite Anti-Menno,” in Shepherds, Servants and Prophets: Leadership among the Russian Mennonites, 1880–1960, edited by Harry Loewen, 297–311 (Kitchener, ON: Pandora, 2003). See also Letkemann's German encyclopedia article: http://www.mennlex.de/doku.php?id=art:penner_david_johann.

Note 2: David J. Penner, Anti-Menno. Beiträge zur Geschichte der Mennoniten in Russland, by A. Reinmarus [pseud.] (Moscow: Zentral-Volker, 1930), https://chortitza.org/Buch/AMeno.pdf

Note 3: Penner, Anti-Menno: Beiträge, 29, 39–41; 42, 45–48; 50–54, 56–57, 63, 65f., 69, 72, 73f., 91. He makes special note of Benjamin H. Unruh; see my published essay, “Benjamin Unruh, MCC [Mennonite Central Committee] and National Socialism,” Mennonite Quarterly Review 96, no. 2 (April 2022), 157–205, https://digitalcollections.tyndale.ca/handle/20.500.12730/1571.

Note 4: Cf. Sergej G. Nelipovič, “Die Deutschen Rußlands in der sowjetischen Historiographie in der 20er, 30er und 40er Jahre des 20. Jahrhunderts,” in Deutsche in Russland und in der Sowjetunion 1914–1941, edited by A. Eisfeld, V. Herdt, and B. Meissner, 12–19 (Berlin: LIT, 2007), 16.

Note 5: Penner, Anti-Menno, 84.  


Print Friendly and PDF

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The End of Schardau (and other Molotschna villages), 1941

My grandmother was four-years old when her parents moved from Petershagen, Molotschna to Schardau in 1908. This story is larger than that of Schardau, but tells how this village and many others in Molotschna were evacuated by Stalin days before the arrival of German troops in 1941. -ANF The bridge across the Dnieper at Chortitza was destroyed by retreating Soviet troops on August 18, 1941 and the hydroelectric dam completed near Einlage in 1932 was also dynamited by NKVD personnel—killing at least 20,000 locals downstream, and forcing the Germans to cross further south at Nikopol. For the next six-and-a-half weeks, the old Mennonite settlement area of Chortitza was continuously shelled by Soviet troops from Zaporozhje on the east side of the river ( note 1 ). The majority of Russian Germans in Crimea and Ukraine paid dearly for Germany’s Blitzkrieg and plans for racially-based population resettlements. As early as August 3, 1941, the Supreme Command of the Soviet Forces received noti...

“The way is finally open”—Russian Mennonite Immigration, 1922-23

In a highly secretive meeting in Ohrloff, Molotschna on February 7, 1922, leaders took a decision to work to remove the entire Mennonite population of some 100,000 people out of the USSR—if at all possible ( note 1 ). B.B. Janz (Ohrloff) and Bishop David Toews (Rosthern, SK) are remembered as the immigration leaders who made it possible to bring some 20,000 Mennonites from the Soviet Union to Canada in the 1920s ( note 2 ). But behind those final numbers were multiple problems. In August 1922, an appeal was made by leaders to churches in Canada and the USA: “The way is finally open, for at least 3,000 persons who have received permission to leave Russia … Two ships of the Canadian Pacific Railway are ready to sail from England to Odessa as soon as the cholera quarantine is lifted. These Russian [Mennonite] refugees are practically without clothing … .” ( Note 3 ) Notably at this point B. B. Janz was also writing Toews, saying that he was utterly exhausted and was preparing to ...

Mennonites in Danzig's Suburbs: Maps and Illustrations

Mennonites first settled in the Danzig suburb of Schottland (lit: "Scotland"; “Stare-Szkoty”; also “Alt-Schottland”) in the mid-1500s. “Danzig” is the oldest and most important Mennonite congregation in Prussia. Menno Simons visited Schottland and Dirk Phillips was its first elder and lived here for a time. Two centuries later the number of families from the suburbs of Danzig that immigrated to Russia was not large: Stolzenberg 5, Schidlitz 3, Alt-Schottland 2, Ohra 1, Langfuhr 1, Emaus 1, Nobel 1, and Krampetz 2 ( map 1 ). However most Russian Mennonites had at least some connection to the Danzig church—whether Frisian or Flemish—if not in the 1700s, then in 1600s. Map 2  is from 1615; a larger number of Mennonites had been in Schottland at this point for more than four decades. Its buildings are not rural but look very Dutch urban/suburban in style. These were weavers, merchants and craftsmen, and since the 17th century they lived side-by-side with a larger number of Jews a...

Sesquicentennial: Proclamation of Universal Military Service Manifesto, January 1, 1874

One-hundred-and-fifty years ago Tsar Alexander II proclaimed a new universal military service requirement into law, which—despite the promises of his predecesors—included Russia’s Mennonites. This act fundamentally changed the course of the Russian Mennonite story, and resulted in the emigration of some 17,000 Mennonites. The Russian government’s intentions in this regard were first reported in newspapers in November 1870 ( note 1 ) and later confirmed by Senator Evgenii von Hahn, former President of the Guardianship Committee ( note 2 ). Some Russian Mennonite leaders were soon corresponding with American counterparts on the possibility of mass migration ( note 3 ). Despite painful internal differences in the Mennonite community, between 1871 and Fall 1873 they put up a united front with five joint delegations to St. Petersburg and Yalta to petition for a Mennonite exemption. While the delegations were well received and some options could be discussed with ministers of the Crown, ...

On Becoming the Quiet in the Land

They are fair questions: “What happened to the firebrands of the Reformation? How did the movement become so withdrawn--even "dour and unexciting,” according to one historian? Mennonites originally referred to themselves as the “quiet in the land” in contrast to the militant--definitely more exciting--militant revolutionaries of Münster ( note 1 ), and identification with Psalm 35:19f.: “Let not my enemies gloat over me … For they do not speak peace, but they devise deceitful schemes against those who live quietly in the land.” How did Mennonites become the “quiet in the land” in Royal Prussia? Minority non-citizen groups in Poland like Jews, Scots, Huguenots or the much smaller body of Mennonites did not enjoy full political or economic rights as citizens. Ecclesial and civil laws left linguistic or religious minorities vulnerable to extortion. Such groups sought to negotiate a Privilegium or charter with the king, which set out a legal basis for some protections of life an...

Mennonite-Designed Mosque on the Molotschna

The “Peter J. Braun Archive" is a mammoth 78 reel microfilm collection of Russian Mennonite materials from 1803 to 1920 -- and largely still untapped by researchers ( note 1 ). In the files of Philipp Wiebe, son-in-law and heir to Johann Cornies, is a blueprint for a mosque ( pic ) as well as another file entitled “Akkerman Mosque Construction Accounts, 1850-1859” ( note 2 ). The Molotschna Mennonites were settlers on traditional Nogai lands; their Nogai neighbours were a nomadic, Muslim Tartar group. In 1825, Cornies wrote a significant anthropological report on the Nogai at the request of the Guardianship Committee, based largely on his engagements with these neighbours on Molotschna’s southern border ( note 3 ). Building upon these experiences and relationships, in 1835 Cornies founded the Nogai agricultural colony “Akkerman” outside the southern border of the Molotschna Colony. Akkerman was a projection of Cornies’ ideal Mennonite village outlined in exacting detail, with un...

The Tinkelstein Family of Chortitza-Rosenthal (Ukraine)

Chortitza was the first Mennonite settlement in "New Russia" (later Ukraine), est. 1789. The last Mennonites left in 1943 ( note 1 ). During the Stalin years in Ukraine (after 1928), marriage with Jewish neighbours—especially among better educated Mennonites in cities—had become somewhat more common. When the Germans arrived mid-August 1941, however, it meant certain death for the Jewish partner and usually for the children of those marriages. A family friend, Peter Harder, died in 2022 at age 96. Peter was born in Osterwick to a teacher and grew up in Chortitza. As a 16-year-old in 1942, Peter was compelled by occupying German forces to participate in the war effort. Ukrainians and Russians (prisoners of war?) were used by the Germans to rebuild the massive dam at Einlage near Zaporizhzhia, and Peter was engaged as a translator. In the next year he changed focus and started teachers college, which included significant Nazi indoctrination. In 2017 I interviewed Peter Ha...

Fraktur (or Gothic) font and Kurrent- (or Sütterlin) handwriting: Nazi ban, 1941

In the middle of the war on January 1, 1942, the Winnipeg-based Mennonitische Rundschau published a new issue without the familiar Fraktur script masthead ( note 1 ). One might speculate on the reasons, but a year earlier Hitler banned the use of the font in the Reich . The Rundschau did not exactly follow all orders from Berlin—the rest of the paper was in Fraktur (sometimes referred to as "Gothic"); when the war ended in 1945, the Rundschau reintroduced the Fraktur font for its masthead. It wasn’t until the 1960s that an issue might have a page or title here or there with the “normal” or Latin font, even though post-war Germany was no longer using Fraktur . By 1973 only the Rundschau masthead is left in Fraktur , and that is only removed in December 1992. Attached is a copy of Nazi Party Secretary Martin Bormann's official letter dated January 3, 1941, which prohibited the use of Fraktur fonts "by order of the Führer. " Why? It was a Jewish invention, apparent...

School Reports, 1890s

Mennonite memoirs typically paint a golden picture of schools in the so-called “golden era” of Mennonite life in Russia. The official “Reports on Molotschna Schools: 1895/96 and 1897/98,” however, give us a more lackluster and realistic picture ( note 1 ). What do we learn from these reports? Many schools had minor infractions—the furniture did not correspond to requirements, there were insufficient book cabinets, or the desks and benches were too old and in need of repair. The Mennonite schoolhouses in Halbstadt and Rudnerweide—once recognized as leading and exceptional—together with schools in Friedensruh, Fürstenwerder, Franzthal, and Blumstein were deemed to be “in an unsatisfactory state.” In other cases a new roof and new steps were needed, or the rooms too were too small, too dark, too cramped, or with moist walls. More seriously in some villages—Waldheim, Schönsee, Fabrikerwiese, and even Gnadenfeld, well-known for its educational past—inspectors recorded that pupils “do not ...

Formidable Fräulein Marga Bräul (1919–2011)

Fräulein Bräul left an indelible mark on two generations of high school students in the Mennonite Colony of Fernheim, Paraguay. Former students and acquaintances recall that Marga Bräul demanded the highest effort and achievements of her students, colleagues and of herself—the kind of teacher you either love or hate but will never forget! In March 1947, Marga was offered a position at the Fernheim Secondary School ( Zentralschule ). A recent refugee to Paraguay from war-torn Europe, she taught mathematics, physics, and chemistry. In 1952, she was the only female faculty member ( note 1 ). Marga wedded a strong commitment to academics with a passion for quality arts and crafts. She provided extensive extra-curricular instruction to students in handiwork and was especially renowned for her artwork—which included painting and woodworking— end of year art exhibits with students, theatre sets, and festival decorations. Marga’s pedagogical philosophy was holistic; she told Mennonite ed...