Skip to main content

Religious Toleration in New Russia and the "Warkentin Affair," 1842

The document below is from the "Peter J. Braun Archives Russian Mennonite Archive"-- a veritable treasure trove of yet-to-be-read primary documents. To date this document has not yet been used in the telling of the "Warkentin Affair." While it does not add new information per se, it brings out well the dynamics and tone of official engagements of government actors with "their" Mennonites and the Mennonite church leaders.

In the early 19th century, there was no question that Russia was among the most religiously tolerant nations that side of the Atlantic. But there was a framework with policies for that to work. How it played out was not always pretty. Here is an example and a helpful primary text.

In 1842, Pure Flemish Elder Jacob Warkentin complained to the President of the Guardianship Committee for Foreign Settlers Eugen von Hahn about Johann Cornies’ “dictatorial” manner and disregard of the church’s approach to discipline and reconciliation in accordance to Matthew 18.

Von Hahn knew of Warkentin’s opposition to Cornies’ reforms and leadership—it had started with Warkentin’s reaction against Cornies’ introduction of more attractive, brick building material (note 1). Warkentin’s interpretation of the Mennonite Privilegium’s requirements and community mission as “model colonists” was as a fixed, unchanging and withdrawn community; however for Cornies it was a dynamic responsibility requiring “model colonists” to innovate and adapt to changing state policies and economic needs (note 2)–and von Hahn stood with Cornies.

Von Hahn personally dismissed the interfering elder from his church office, and forbade him to speak or participate in community events (note 3). Other elders, moreover, were not to acknowledge him as a ministerial colleague, and his congregation was to be divided into three, with three newly elected elders.

When von Hahn returned from the capital to Odessa in August 1842, he learnt that his warnings and personal reprimands had been ignored by certain members of the former “Warkentin congregation,” and that the congregation chose to tarry with their election. Here’s his letter to the elders of the Molotschna churches, which I have transcribed and translated (note 4; pic).

To the Church Elders of the Molotschna Mennonite District

From the reports by local colony officials provided to me upon my return from St. Petersburg, I noted with great regret that, notwithstanding all warnings and personal reprimands, some members of the former “Warkentin Congregation” acted disobediently and rebelliously during the recent election for district chair, especially Fürstenwerder’s village mayor Thun, who with his highly illegal and punishable acts displayed before subordinate residents enticed them to disobey, thereby wreaking disorder and harm in the community.

Respectively I have built upon the influence of the church elders, and thus until know have had the confident hope that the latter would not fail to use every means possible to ensure that peace and quiet develop on their own. Now I feel compelled to use the most severe measures in order to bring this scourge to a complete halt, and to put the guilty ones into a position that will render them completely innocuous in the future. It is very hard for me to come as one who must judge and punish, when with all my heart I want only to be father and guardian to you. My duties are above all sacred to me, and I would sin against my authority if I were to put up any longer with the spirit reigning in some of the Mennonite colonies [villages].

Accordingly, in very short order I will personally arrange a local investigation of everything that has occurred, and the guilty may then only blame themselves if they have brought misfortune upon themselves.

Once again I declare officially that Warkentin has been irrevocably discharged, and likewise, that Peter Toews of Tiege cannot become head of the District Office, and that every act which is or will yet be directed against these orders will be punishable.

Insofar as I hereby publicize this notice to the church elders, whose good sentiments for the well-being of their congregations are sufficiently known to me, I also request of you, that you mobilize all of your available church resources, so that through your cooperation not only will the scourge be removed, but also that what is good and the best generally will be promoted. This cooperation could not be demonstrated any better than if the church elders would leverage their total influence not only to bring any new growth [of the scourge] in the congregations to a complete halt, but also to bring those who are already guilty to genuine repentance; for only deep, openhearted contrition can bring into motion a softening of the deserved punishment.

[Signed] Vice-Chair of the Guardianship Committee, v. Hahn, Odessa, 26 August, 1842.

“Cornies’ men” duly informed the Large Congregation’s leaders that Warkentin would be exiled and subject to corporal punishment by the military should they not comply by a certain date (note 5).

Von Hahn’s reluctant intervention in colony religious and political affairs for “disobedience” or “rebelliousness” towards authorities was not unique in the Warkentin case. Similar occurrences are documented in the Lutheran, Pietist Separatist and Catholic colonies as well (note 6), and were entirely consistent with Russia’s otherwise broad protections and freedoms within its self-understanding and mission to serve and rule nobly over many peoples (note 7).

While the principle of complete religious toleration was inviolable, this was balanced by a second principle: “upon the interference of religion in the affairs of the state, the latter not only may, but must itself interfere in the affairs of the church and indicate to [that church] its true purpose and limits” (note 8).

Local administrators judged which acts of faith had political content “in accordance with the particular spirit of each” (note 9), and they were authorized to intervene.

            ---Arnold Neufeldt-Fast

---Notes---

Note 1: Cf. Delbert Plett, Golden Years: The Mennonite Kleine Gemeinde in Russia, 1812–1849 (Steinbach, MB: Self-published, 1985), 286 https://www.mharchives.ca/download/1216/. See also John Staples, “Afforestation as Performance Art: Johann Cornies’ Aesthetics of Civilization,” in Minority Report: Mennonite Identities in Imperial Russia and Soviet Ukraine Reconsidered, 1789–1945, edited by Leonard G. Friesen, 61–81 (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2018), 73. Also Staples, “Religion, Politics, and the Mennonite Privilegium in the Early Nineteenth Century: Reconsidering the Warkentin Affair,” Journal of Mennonite Studies 21 (2003), 72–88, https://jms.uwinnipeg.ca/index.php/jms/article/view/886/885.

Note 2: Cf. Staples, “Afforestation as Performance Art: Johann Cornies,” 70; 74.

Note 3: Heinrich Neufeld, “Report Regarding the Exile of Jakob Warkentin, Altona, Molotschna,” 1 [1/2]. Translated by Ben Hoeppner. From Mennonite Library and Archives, Bethel College, SA. 2, 1171, https://mla.bethelks.edu/archives/sa_2_1171/.

Note 4: Evgenii von Hahn, “An die Kirchen-Aeltesten des Molotschner Mennonniten Bezirks,” in Peter J. Braun Russian Mennonite Archive, file 805, reel 31, translated by Arnold Neufeldt-Fast. From Robarts Library, University of Toronto. On von Hahn, cf. the helpful piece by David H, Epp, "Hahn, Eduard von (19th century)," Global Anabaptist Mennonite Encyclopedia Online (1956), https://gameo.org/index.php?title=Hahn,_Eduard_von_(19th_century)&oldid=145375.

Note 5: H. Neufeld, “Report Regarding the Exile of Jakob Warkentin, Altona, Molotschna,” 5 [6/7]; 7 [9]; 11 [13].

Note 6: Cf. Evgenii von Hahn, “An den Oberschulzen des Berdjanschen Kolonisten-Bezirks Friedrich Prinz Nr. 3031” (May 13, 1843), in Jakob Stach, ed., Grunau und die Mariupoler Kolonien (Leipzig: Hirzel, 1942), viii–ix, fn. 24; https://chortitza.org/Buch/Grunau.pdf. Cf. also Paul Werth, The Tsar’s Foreign Faiths, Toleration and the fate of religious freedom in imperial Russia (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014), 108f.

Note 7: Cf. “Memorandum des Ministers des Innern (1804),” in Josef A. Malinowsky, Die Planerkolonien am Asowschen Meere (Stuttgart: Ausland und Heimat Verlag, 1928), Anhang III; https://chortitza.org/kb/malinows.pdf. See also Robert Crews, For Prophet and Tsar: Islam and Empire in Russia and Central Asia (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2009), 10.

Note 8: This implicit or operational principle was in a Special Commission Memorandum in 1866; cited in Werth, The Tsar’s Foreign Faiths, 108.

Note 9: According to instructions by the empire’s police chief, Aleksandr Benkendorff, to subordinates in 1837; cited in Werth, The Tsar’s Foreign Faiths, 110.


Print Friendly and PDF

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Turning Weapons into Waffle Irons!

Turning Weapons into Waffle Irons:  Heart-Shaped Waffles and a smooth talking General In 1874 with Mennonite immigration to North America in full swing, the Tsar sent General Eduard von Totleben to the colonies to talk the remaining Mennonites out of leaving ( note 1 ). He came with the now legendary offer of alternative service. Totleben made presentations in Mennonite churches and had many conversations in Mennonite homes. Decades later the women still recalled how fond Totleben was of Mennonite heart-shaped waffles. He complemented the women saying, “How beautiful are the hearts of Mennonites!,” and he joked about how “much Mennonites love waffles ( Waffeln ), but not weapons ( Waffen )” ( note 2 )! His visit resulted in an extensive reversal of opinion and the offer was welcomed officially by the Molotschna and Chortitza Colony ministerials. And upon leaving, the general was gifted with a poem by Bernhard Harder ( note 3 ) and a waffle iron ( note 4 ). Harder was an inf...

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, ...

What is the Church to Say? Letter 4 (of 4) to American Mennonite Friends

Irony is used in this post to provoke and invite critical thought; the historical research on the Mennonite experience is accurate and carefully considered. ~ANF Preparing for your next AGM: Mennonite Congregations and Deportations Many U.S. Mennonite pastors voted for Donald Trump, whose signature promise was an immediate start to “the largest deportation operation in American history.” Confirmed this week, President Trump will declare a national emergency and deploy military assets to carry this out. The timing is ideal; in January many Mennonite congregations have their Annual General Meeting (AGM) with opportunity to review and update the bylaws of their constitution. Need help? We have related examples from our tradition, which I offer as a template, together with a few red flags. First, your congregational by-laws.  It is unlikely you have undocumented immigrants in your congregation, but you should flag this. Model: Gustav Reimer, a deacon and notary public from the ...

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...

Village Reports Commando Dr. Stumpp, 1942: List and Links

Each of the "Commando Dr. Stumpp" village reports written during German occupation of Ukraine 1942 contains a mountain of demographic data, names, dates, occupations, numbers of untimely deaths (revolution, famines, abductions), narratives of life in the 1930s, of repression and liberation, maps, and much more. The reports are critical for telling the story of Mennonites in the Soviet Union before 1942, albeit written with the dynamics of Nazi German rule at play. Reports for some 56 (predominantly) Mennonite villages from the historic Mennonite settlement areas of Chortitza, Sagradovka, Baratow, Schlachtin, Milorodovka, and Borosenko have survived. Unfortunately no village reports from the Molotschna area (known under occupation as “Halbstadt”) have been found. Dr. Karl Stumpp, a prolific chronicler of “Germans abroad,” became well-known to German Mennonites (Prof. Benjamin Unruh/ Dr. Walter Quiring) before the war as the director of the Research Center for Russian Germans...

"A Small Town near Auschwitz” – Chortitza Mennonite Refugee/ Resettlement Camps

Simple proximity to a place of horrors does not equal knowledge or complicity. Many Gnadenfeld-area Mennonite refugees were, for example, temporarily housed 20 km. away from the Bergen-Belsen Concentration Camp where 15-year-old Anne Frank died ultimately of typhus ( note 1 ). The day after liberation by British troops on April 15, 1945, camp survivors began to flow through neighbouring villages. “What a sight they were! They had been tortured and starved, and were swollen from lack of food. … We could hardly believe that the glorious country of Germany could commit such crimes against people,” Susanna Toews wrote ( note 2 ). My mother was only seven, but she remembers overhearing shocking descriptions given by their host family’s teenaged girls forced by the British to clean some of the camp buses. What about the much larger death camp at Auschwitz? There is a book entitled: A Small Town near Auschwitz: Ordinary Nazis and the Holocaust. It is about an administrator living near the ...

1921: Formation of the “Union of Citizens of Dutch Lineage in Ukraine”

Famine was imminent; unprecedented drought; taxes and requisitions exceeded what was harvested; some villages had no horses; extortion and arrests were widespread; many men were disenfranchised and barred from village affairs (see note 1 ). Lenin responded with the 1921 “New Economic Policy” (NEP), which allowed for a degree of market flexibility within the context of socialism to ward off complete economic collapse. A fixed-tax was imposed, grain quotas were eased, farmers were allowed a small amount of land and could sell excess produce at free-market prices after taxes had been paid. Much was in the air. In secret talks, Soviet Trade Commissar Leonid Krasin told the head of the Eastern Section in the German Foreign Office, Gustav Behrendt, that the USSR was “prepared—just like Catherine the Great of old—to call hundreds of thousands of German colonists into the land and transfer them to large, closed complexes for settlement,” especially in Turkestan and the North Caucasus, be...

Mennonites and the Crimean War (1853-56)

Martin Klaassen was traveling through the Molotschna Mennonite Colony when the Crimean War broke out in 1853 ( note 1 ). His diary notes that the following hymn was sung before the sermon: December 1853 . With regards to the war which broke out between Russia and Turkey, the song, No: 723 “O Lord, the clouds of war are threatening now, above our heads we see them roll” was sung before the sermon” ( note 2 ). As the war effort grew, thousands of troops came through Molotschna: January 14, 1854 . Today our colony has received billets: in Halbstadt about 1,000 soldiers. It is said that Joh. Neufelds have offered liquor ( Branntwein ), naturally without charge. The soldiers are supposed to have marched in with jubilant singing and much hilarity. They had been very happy for the wonderful reception they got, and promised to accomplish great things. In March, England and France also declared war on Russia. March 26, 1854 . At noon today there was suddenly a military transport at ...

1920s: Those who left and those who stayed behind

The picture below is my grandmother's family in 1928. Some could leave but most stayed behind. In 1928 a small group of some 511 Soviet Mennonites were unexpectedly approved for emigration ( note 1 ). None of the circa 21,000 Mennonites who emigrated from Russia in the 1920s “simply” left. And for everyone who left, at least three more hoped to leave but couldn’t. It is a complex story. Canada only wanted a certain type—young healthy farmers—and not all were transparent about their skills and intentions The Soviet Union wanted to rid itself of a specifically-defined “excess,” and Mennonite leadership knew how to leverage that Estate owners, and Selbstschutz /White Army militia were the first to be helped to leave, because they were deemed as most threatened community members; What role did money play? Thousands paid cash for their tickets; Who made the final decision on group lists, and for which regions? This was not transparent. Exit visa applications were also regularly reje...

Molotschna Elder Heinrich Dirks and tensions with Mennonite Brethren

Russian Mennonites were not always kind to each other—and nowhere is this seen better than in the tensions between “old” Mennonites and the “separatist” Mennonite Brethren, who had their beginnings in Gnadenfeld, Molotschna in 1860. Heinrich Dirks (1842-1915) was the first Russian Mennonite overseas missionary and later long-time Gnadenfeld, Molotschna ( note 1 ). Everything about Dirks’ life suggests that he would have joined the Brethren in 1860. He too was influenced by the "powerful and gripping” conversionist ministry of Eduard Wüst in his youth. Dirks was a young adult in the Gnadenfeld congregation in South Russia where the Mennonite Brethren /separatist movement began. Shortly thereafter, he was trained in the German pietist Barmen Mission School (1863-67), and famously travelled to Sumatra (Indonesia) where he started a mission outpost and school. The Mennonite Brethren too would later connect the global mission imperative with the impending return of Christ as did Dirk...