Skip to main content

Mennonite “Displaced Persons” and MCC’s “Jewish Argument”

At the conclusion of the war Mennonite Central Committee (MCC) was fully aware that “their” 13,000-plus Russian Mennonite refugees in Germany did not qualify as displaced persons and for support from the International Refugee Organization. They were refused IRO “care and maintenance” as Soviet citizens, i.e., they were free to return home. MCC sought to convince the IRO that the Mennonite refugees were not “Soviet Germans” and--if they had became German citizens in Warthegau (also a disqualifier), it was done under duress (note 1).

Astonishingly MCC’s Europe Director Peter J. Dyck—later seen as the Moses of the Mennonites—proposed to top military personnel at US military headquarters in Frankfurt, Germany (USFET) in July 1946, that Mennonites be granted the same status as Jews as a persecuted people.

“By a recent decree all Jews, regardless of their nationality, are automatically given the status of 'D.P.' [displaced person] on the grounds that they are victims of persecution. During my second morning in Frankfurt we also came to regard our R.M. [Russian Mennonite] problem from the persecution angle. I explained that because of their strong religious inclination … etc. etc. the Mennonites in Russia were undoubtedly victims of persecution. It was agreed that under these circumstances all our people ought to be considered as persecutees and as such automatically given the D.P. status … We are now waiting for a decision from Frankfurt.” (Note 2).

With little comprehension of the enormity of Jewish losses, in this meeting Dyck explained in detail the unique situation and plight of the Russian Mennonites who, on the one hand, do not wish to register as “Russian” and be repatriated, and on the other, know that if they register as “German” they are barred from the entitlements of Displaced Persons. “They are considered Volksdeutsche [ethnic Germans] because of the [naturalization] papers which they carry since their arrival in Poland (Warthegau) in 1943,” Peter Dyck reported to the MCC executive (note 3).

Dyck was optimistic that the US military would understand that Russian Mennonites “had to accept” naturalization papers. “That they did not value them nor even understood sufficiently the real meaning of such documents is proven by the fact that about half of them have either destroyed or lost theirs (note 4). Dyck’s “concentrated effort” with the US military was “to clarify the entire picture showing that our people had no say in the matter when they were brought to Germany and given the passes” (note 5).

In particular, Dyck had embraced and represented the argument that “Mennonite” oddly qualifies as a “nationality,” in similar ways to which Judaism too is distinct.

“Naïve? I hope not, and I very much hope that no one will say that these poor Mennonite refugees and those of the MCC who have to do with them are being expedient and diplomatic, that we are looking for an easy way out. When the Board of US Officers interviewed our people here in Berlin they invariably asked the question concerning nationality … by far the greater number of them simply and boldly replied “I am Mennonite”. A certain captain and other officers tried to tell them that there was no Mennonite nationality and no Mennonite state … so please would the refugee answer “properly.” It was of little use, however, because our people continued to give the same “stupid” answer. … There was no getting away from the fact that although officially and legally such a concept is not being recognized and probably cannot be defended it nevertheless is firmly held by these people who, having lived for over 150 years in a country as “guests” have come to regard themselves as a separate and distinct ‘Volk.’ … The only classic parallels of ths which I know of is that of the Jew.” (Note 6)

Dyck had not understood the enormity of the Holocaust. His elevation of “Mennonite” to an ethnic-based, even national, designation and parallel to the uniqueness of the Jewish people was certainly expedient and theologically bizarre and dangerous.

The Jewish argument was indeed used by Mennonite refugees seeking “Displaced Persons” status. “We often compared ourselves with the Jews,” Julius Kliewer told his interviewer. “The religious persecutions of the last four hundred years are the same for us as for the Jews. We have no homeland, we have no country that we may call our own.” Kliewer told the interviewer that a person must be “born a Mennonite … we are not only a religion. We consider ourself a people,” who still speak “Dutch, the Frisian Platt” (note 7).

Was MCC’s “Jewish argument” inspired by the responses of the refugees as Dyck claimed, or did MCC coach the refugees with a series of standardized answers for this strategy?

Ironically after years of racial propaganda including by their own people in Germany (Prof. Benjamin H. Unruh, Dr. Walter Quiring, and Heinrich Schröder, etc.) that exclaimed them to be biologically pure carriers of “German blood,” the Mennonite refugees were now guided by North American co-religionists to adopt different descriptors: “[W]e were refugees from Russia. Our ancestors had come from Holland, and we would like to stay here until our relatives could help us over into Canada” (note 8).

MCC had strong political connections especially with American IRO staff, but many UN officials were very skeptical of the claims. For those unable to enter The Netherlands, MCC established refugee camps at Backnang near Stuttgart and Gronau.

Online scans of Mennonite applications to the IRO for assistance and protection show that applicants consistently identified their nationality as “Dutch-Frisian-Mennonite” or “Mennonites of Dutch ancestry,” with “Mennonite” noted for religion as well. Two years earlier, however, all had affirmed they were “100% German” on their naturalization forms (EWZ)—then coached and assisted by Unruh, whom Reichsführer-SS Himmler once called the “Moses of the Mennonites.” Now their “primary language” was never or rarely indicated as German or Low German, but “Low Dutch,” “Frisian,” or “Platt Dutch” (note 9).

Asked if they had received identification papers as naturalized Germans or as refugees by the EWZ, all applicants falsely answered “nein” (no).

Male applicants were examined more carefully, and sometimes with the assistance of the Polish Consulate.

A “Becker” from Rudnerweide was denied assistance based on his reputation in annexed Poland: “He possessed a farm at Krusza Duchowna [Lindenthal] … He was of German nationality and his behaviour against the Polish population was very rude and brutal.” Becker was denied legal and political protection or assistance through the IRO Care and Maintenance Program.

In the case of a “Rempel,” from Einlage, “very strongly suspect that he was in the German Army … with the TODT Organization. He is not the concern of the IRO. Ineligible.”

For a Regehr from Gnadenheim: “Petitioner is a Mennonite … In appeal he merely states he is of Dutch ethnic origin and therefore should not be excluded under Part II 4(a) as of German ethnic origin. Check with Berlin indicates that petitioner came to Germany under EWZ, acquired German citizenship in May 1943, and served with the Wehrmacht from 17 October 1941 … there is a photograph available of petitioner in Wehrmacht uniform. –Not within the mandate of the organization.” (Note 10)

For the individual IRO applications, MCC did not collect or provide information on previous German military service or acceptance of German citizenship. In contrast, many of the EWZ files clearly pointed not only to voluntary acceptance of German citizenship, but also to German military service—sons or husbands in the Waffen-SS, the SD, or Wehrmacht—and other forms of collaboration. These documents threatened to disqualify almost all Soviet Mennonites for IRO aid.

A younger woman from Alexanderkrone had noted in her EWZ file that she was a student in the SS-run teachers college in Lutbrandau, Warthegau led by Karl Götz, while in her IRO application she claimed she was farming in Lutbrandau without identification papers.

One applicant “Katherine” from Neu Chortitza claimed that “she is not of German origin but of Dutch origin, yet unfortunately she can’t prove it. All of the identification papers were taken by partisans … She [is applying] with the assistance of the Mennonite Central Committee in Holland-Amsterdam.” Two years earlier, however, Unruh and Prussian Mennonites helped to establish the legal German origin of almost all of the Mennonites coming from Ukraine.

Each of the later applications above noted assistance from MCC, and each applicant falsely stated that they were neither naturalized as Germans nor had they ever received any identification papers from the EWZ or the VoMi (Ethnic German Liaison Office).

Available applications from those born in the eastern Molotschna are consistent: Pastwa, Hierschau, Alexanderkrone, Steinfeld, Sparrau, Franztal, Margenau, Gnadenheim, Nikolaidorf, Alexanderwohl, Fürstenwerder, Tiegerwiede, Rudnerweide.

Chortitza files are similar. For one applicant born in Nieder Chortitza the IRO official writes: the “Petitioner is obviously lying.” He had registered as an “ethnic German” and “took a farm” from a priest who had been “expelled from his home. … He knew that he was taking over the farm. [He] is not the concern of the IRO. Is of ethnic German origin” (note 11).

Applications show uniformity on many key questions—which strongly suggests that applicants were coached by MCC staff.

IRO researchers and officials however had access to the EWZ files and flagged the truthfulness of applications appropriately. MCC’s questionable arguments and techniques have also been documented by Canadian historian Ted Regehr (note 12).

Peter Letkemann calls MCC’s claims to a remote and obscure Dutch ancestry a Notlüge, a “lie of necessity,” required by the emergency situation (note 13). The same might apply to the other lies above as well.

            ---Arnold Neufeldt-Fast

---Notes---

Note 1: Cf. Gerhard Rempel, “Cornelius Franz Klassen: Rescuer of the Mennonite Remnant, 1894–1954,” in Shepherds, Servants and Prophets: Leadership Among the Russian Mennonites (ca. 1880–1960), edited by Harry Loewen (Kitchener, ON: Pandora, 2003), 199.

Note 2: Peter J. Dyck, “Memorandum on Mennonite Refugees in Germany as on July 25, 1946,” 2f., MCC Archives, Akron, MCC CPS and other Corr 1945-47 File 30 Dyck Peter J. 1946 (memorandum).

Note 3: Dyck, “Memorandum on Mennonite Refugees in Germany as on July 25, 1946,” 2.

Note 4: Dyck, “Memorandum on Mennonite Refugees in Germany as on July 25, 1946,” 2.

Note 5: Dyck, “Memorandum on Mennonite Refugees in Germany as on July 25, 1946,” 2.

Note 6: Dyck, “Memorandum on Mennonite Refugees in Germany as on July 25, 1946,” 3f. 

Note 7: “David P. Boder Interviews Julius Klüver, September 19, 1946,” transcript, Voices of the Holocaust Project, http://voices.iit.edu/interviewee?doc=braunA. Cf. “A.E.F. D.P. Registration Record, Munich, February 1946 for Julius Kliewer (b. 1902).”

Note 8: Susanna Toews, Trek to Freedom: The Escape of Two Sisters from South Russia during World War II, translated by Helen Megli (Winkler, MB: Heritage Valley, 1976), 40.

Note 9: For hundreds of Mennonite IRO applications, search by name or village in online https://collections.arolsen-archives.org.

Note 10: IRO Care and Maintenance Program, CM/1, Review Board, “Jakob Regehr,” case 12563, November 30, 1949, Arolsen Archiveshttps://collections.arolsen-archives.org.

Note 11: Cf. document no. 79151613 for Heinrich Götz Nieder Chortitza, in “IRO Care and Maintenance Program” (CM files/1), Arolsen Archives, https://collections.arolsen-archives.org/en/search/?s=nieder%20chortitza.

Note 12: Ted D. Regehr, “Of Dutch or German Ancestry? Mennonite Refugees, MCC and the International Refugee Organization,” Journal of Mennonite Studies 13 (1995), 7–25, https://jms.u'winnipeg.ca/index.php/jms/article/view/441/441.

Note 13: Peter Letkemann, “Nachwort,” in Fügungen und Führungen: Benjamin Heinrich Unruh, 1881–1959, by Heinrich B. Unruh (Detmold: Verein zur Erforschung und Pflege des Russlanddeutschen Mennonitentums, 2009), 427.

---

To cite this page: Arnold Neufeldt-Fast, “Mennonite Displaced Persons' and MCC's 'Jewish Argument,'” History of the Russian Mennonites (blog), May 12, 2023, 

Print Friendly and PDF

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Warthegau, Nazism and two 15-year-old Mennonites, 1944

Katharina Esau offered me a home away from home when I was a student in Germany in the 1980s. The Soviet Union released her and her family in 1972. Käthe Heinrichs—her maiden name (b. Aug. 18, 1928)—and my Uncle Walter Bräul were classmates in Gnadenfeld during Nazi occupation of Ukraine, and experienced the Gnadenfeld group “trek” as 15-year-olds together. Before she passed, she wrote her story ( note 1 )—and I had opportunity to interview my uncle. Käthe and Walter both arrived in Warthegau—German annexed Poland—in March 1944 ( note 2 ), and the Reich had a plan for their lives. In February 1944, the Governor of Warthegau ordered the Hitler Youth (HJ) organization to “care for Black Sea German youth” ( note 3 ). Youth were examined for the Hitler Youth, but also for suitability for elite tracks like the one-year Landjahr (farm year and service) program. The highly politicized training of the Landjahr was available for young people in Hitler Youth and its counterpart the League of G...

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...

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 ...

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...

Stalin’s Purge (1937-38) and Mennonite Suffering: 8 theses

1. Millions died under Stalin One of the more recent studies on the Stalin-era estimates that more than 28.7 million people suffered in the northern prisons and slave camps of the Gulag and 2.75 million people died there during Stalin’s reign ( note 1 ). To this number must be added the “close to a million political executions, the millions who died in transit to the Gulag, and some six to seven million who died of starvation during the early 1930s” ( note 2 ). The mass deportation of workers and peasants provided millions of forced labourers in the Arctic and Siberia. George K. Epp calculated that approximately one-third of Mennonites in the Soviet Union—at least 30,000—died due to exposure, beatings, overwork, disease, starvation or shootings ( note 3 ). 2. Mennonites in Ukraine suffered together with their Ukrainian neighbours Moscow was fearful of “losing Ukraine” ( note 4 ) and specifically targeted it with a “lengthy schooling” designed to ruthlessly break the threat of U...

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 ...

Queen Elizabeth II and Aunt Adina Neufeld Bräul

This month (April 2023) we celebrated my aunt’s 97th birthday—Adina Neufeld Bräul. Queen Elizabeth II and Aunt Adina were born within hours of each other, April 20-21, 1926. She once told me—in somewhat different words—that this makes her wonder about God’s providence … In 1944 in German-annexed Poland, my 16-year-old uncle Walter Bräul was required to report for military service. His first thought: no good soldier should be without a girlfriend! Before leaving for training, he asked one of the girls from "the trek" on a date to see a movie in Exin. Seven years later they would marry in Paraguay. Adina and her mother and sister were on the same trek or group (Gnadenfeld/ Molotschna) out of Ukraine as Walter and my mother (in the 2023 photo). Adina’s most terrible memory of the trek was when their wagon almost tipped over into a deep ravine. She was 17—a year older than Walter—and it was Walter’s 17-year-old brother Peter who literally jumped from his wagon to physically stop ...

1923 Mennonite immigrants "kept behind": Lechfeld (Bavaria) transit camp

An important part of the larger 1923 immigration story includes the chapter of the hundreds who were held back at Riga and Southampton and taken to the Lechfeld (Bavaria) transit camp for medical care. “Germany generously and magnanimously helped our organizations, on my intercession, to overcome the manifold difficulties connected with such a ( Volksbewegung ) movement of people in such critical times,” Benjamin H. Unruh wrote some years later ( note 1 ). Just as the first group of Russländer Mennonites set foot in Canada 100 years ago this month, the North American relief effort in the USSR was also winding down (August 1923). The famine relief work in 1921 and 1922 had found broad support in the North American Mennonite community. However excitement about a larger immigration of Russian Mennonites to North America was muted, and a new call to action could not forge the same level of cooperation across Mennonite groups. The plan required huge money guarantees. In USSR B.B. Janz h...

A Traveler's Impressions of the Molotschna, 1927

In November 1927, Susanna Toews of Ohrloff, Molotschna wrote to her brother Gerhard in Canada, "Father is sleeping and the sisters are reading, even though they have read the stuff ten times. . .. Twice a week we get Das Neue Dorf . We read the most important material the first evening and then father reads the rest of it the next day" ( note 1 ). A youth in Friedensruh, Molotschna reported to the communist youth paper Die Saat in 1928, that their village receives 13 copies of Das Neue Dorf , 6 copies of Die Saat , one of the Moscow-based Deutsche Zentral-Zeitung , 16 copies of Die Trompete, 2 copies of Neuland , and some Russian papers as well. On average, 2 papers per household--all communist papers. A Mennonite-based monthly agricultural journal, “The Practical Agriculturalist” ( Der praktische Landwirt ) had been approved for publication in Ukraine in 1924 but was shut down in December 1926. Government authorities in Ukraine were exasperated to see a “significant a...

The Shift from Dutch to German, 1700s

Already in 1671, Mennonite Flemish Elder Georg Hansen in Danzig published his German-language catechism ( Glaubens-Bericht für die Jugend ) as preparation for youth seeking baptism. Though educational competencies varied, Hansen’s Glaubens-Bericht assumed that youth preparing for baptism had a stronger ability to read complex German than Dutch ( note 1 ). Popular Mennonite preacher Jacob Denner (1659–1746), originally from the Hamburg-Altona Mennonite Church, lived in Danzig for four years in the early 1700s. A first volume of his Dutch sermons was published in 1706 in Danzig and Amsterdam, and then in 1730 and 1751 he published two German collections. Untrained preachers would often read Denner’s sermons: “Those who preached German—which all Prussian preachers around 1750 did, with the exception of the Danzig preachers—had no sermons books from their co-religionists other than this one by Jacob Denner” ( note 2 ). In Danzig and the Vistula Delta region there were some differences...