Skip to main content

Clothing the Naked Anabaptist

The Naked Anabaptist: this title recommended by the editors of Stuart Murray’s book certainly helped sales for a text certainly worth reading (note 1).

Early Anabaptist beginnings have resonated with many twenty-first century Christians in the global north who seek new post-Christendom expressions of church.

Here is Murray’s summary of those sixteenth-century convictions:

  • to follow Christ in life whatever the consequences;
  • to regard the Bible as authoritative not only in debate, but also in living and with ethical issues;
  • to hold to the separation of church and state;
  • to live in mutual accountability with other baptized members of the community, which includes using church discipline to maintain distinctiveness;
  • to share resources;
  • to live non-violently and to tell the truth;
  • and to expect that suffering is normal for faithful disciples and is a mark of the true church (note 2).

Indeed, most of those themes can be found clustered together in some early Anabaptist communities, for example, in Bruges. While these communities were short-lived, they were never “naked.” Each came with unique cultural baggage; their members were as human as you or I, and their context determined how and why they "clothed" and presented themselves as they did.

Are the “clothed” Anabaptists—i.e., especially those “next generations” of Mennonites who actually did the work of experimentation and construction of Anabaptist models in their contexts and who passed on a tradition—at all helpful for post-Christendom recoveries?

At the very point when the Mennonite projects in Soviet Union had almost completely collapsed with Josef Stalin’s purges (1937), J. Winfield Fretz, America’s first Mennonite sociologist, concluded that the “Russian Mennonite” community had successfully developed “at least fifteen different types of mutual aid activities” in a unique attempt to build a “holy community,” that is, “economic and social institutions that were in keeping with their religious convictions.” These experiments were governed by “a commonly accepted ethic, the centre of which was the principle of mutual aid” (note 3).

The activities and institutions mentioned by Fretz included:

  • fire insurance;
  • schools and agricultural associations;
  • an orphan fund and credit banks;
  • mutual ownership of breeding stock;
  • financial assistance to younger generations;
  • care for the aged;
  • care for the village poor and assistance to widows;
  • medical assistance;
  • cooperative marketing of products;
  • co-responsibility for village problems;
  • cultural support with regard to schools, music, and gatherings for funerals and weddings.

Though not unique or original to Menno Simons, mutual aid or the idea of watching and caring for fellow travellers on the journey of faith “where no one is allowed to beg” (note 4) was a pillar of his teaching, and forms one of the most consistent threads in the Anabaptist–Mennonite story.

Of course, many of these Mennonite commitments in Greater Russia matured over time; and Fretz’s assumption that these developed with “complete freedom from interference by the State” is very far from accurate.

Yet Fretz noted correctly, however, that it was not church leadership that directly encouraged “the formation of mutual aid societies”—though it “exerts its influence” and is at the “centre of the community.”

Rather, when permitted, this is “the course Mennonitism will take where it is free to apply its principles, economic and social as well as political, to every-day life” (note 5).

While Fretz’s account of uniquely Anabaptist-Mennonite achievements in the Russian Mennonite story would require much more contextualization and demythologization today, it is a large and important claim—especially when some had long agreed that “[f]rom the standpoint of the vision of the Anabaptists, however, the Mennonite Russian experiment was a failure. It was a failure in so far as it depended largely upon cultural supports and ethnic lines of continuity instead of pure spirituality” (note 6).

That critique too is rooted in myth without context, assuming “naked” Anabaptists with a "pure spirituality."

Russia’s 100,000 Mennonites (pre-WWI pop.) pulled on some very important Anabaptist strands to develop their own "Anabaptist clothing" for a very unique and welcoming host community: a multi-confessional, multi-cultural Imperial Russia which was very different from Western Europe or North America.

Of course there were many inner-contradictions in what they developed, and gross failures along the way as well.

But when the context changed—e.g., with a very toxic and eventually brutal form of Soviet post-Christendom—there was consensus among those charged to bring the Mennonite experiment to end that the clothing was quite difficult to remove! Here a few examples:

1. 1925: Report by the Central Bureau of the German Section to the Communist Central Committee: The Mennonite population is uniquely “characterized by a narrow-national [German-Mennonite] outlook, lack of class stratification, [and a] passive attitude … toward Soviet social life”—which makes party and Soviet work among them “more difficult” (note 7).

2. 1925: Commission of the Presidium Commission: “It is extremely difficult to conduct [communist] party work in Mennonite colonies because it is carried out among a population saturated with religious fanaticism and caste isolation” (note 8).

3. 1926: German Section of the Zaporozhye Okrug Committee: “Extraordinary difficulties” are reported in the Chortitza Colony, where authorities are having little success in drawing Mennonites “to active participation in the construction of the Soviet order” and into “the public life of village clubs and [communist] reading rooms.” The committee concludes that the youth are both “restrained by parents” and “by preachers in meeting houses [churches]” (note 9).

By 1937-38 when the terror and executions reached their peak in the Mennonite communities, there were again many naked, severely tested Anabaptists—with only a few bare (but critical) threads of the tradition left; arguably these were enough to survive and begin anew to cloth another generation.

While the “clothing” of the Russian Mennonite experience and heritage was certainly stitched with cloth patches from the sixteenth century, as it were, it also offers modern Anabaptists a broader “wardrobe” of important options to try on and adapt for their own more or less toxic post-Christendom contexts.

            ---Arnold Neufeldt-Fast

---Notes---

Note 1: Stuart Murray, The Naked Anabaptist: The Bare Essentials of a Radical Faith (Scottdale, PA: Herald, 2010).

Note 2: Murray, Naked Anabaptist, 152f. The necessity of suffering was a unique emphasis amongst the Bruges Anabaptists like de Roore. Cf. Martha J. Reimer-Blok, “The Theological Identity of Flemish Anabaptists: A Study of the Letters of Jacob de Roore,” Mennonite Quarterly Review 62, no. 3 (July 1988), 318–331; 326f.; 331.

Note 3: J. Winfield Fretz, “Mutual Aid Among Mennonites (I),” Mennonite Quarterly Review 13, no. 1 (1939), 28–58.

Note 4: Complete Writings of Menno Simons, edited by J. C. Wenger (Scottdale, PA: Herald, 1984), 558.

Note 5: Fretz, “Mutual Aid Among Mennonites (I),” 36; 58.

Note 6: J. Lawrence Burkholder, The Problem of Social Responsibility from the Perspective of the Mennonite Church (Elkhart, IN: Institute of Mennonite Studies, 1989), 144. Cf. also (no author given), Russian Mennonites (Ephrata, PA: Eastern Mennonite, 2002), 49f.: “The Mennonites who went to Russia desired to preserve their faith, their German language, and their agricultural way of life. Yet, from the very beginning, they forfeited aspects of the early Anabaptist view of the church.” See also Robert Kreider, “The Anabaptist Conception of the Church in the Russian Environment, 1789–1870,” Mennonite Quarterly Review 25, no. 1 (January 1951), 17–33.

Note 7: “Minutes of a joint session of the Central Bureau of the German Section of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Ukraine with German sections of okrug committees about work with Mennonites November 10–12, 1925,” in J. Toews and P. Toews, Union of Citizens of Dutch Lineage in Ukraine (1922–1927): Mennonite and Soviet Documents, translated by J. B. Toews, O. Shmakina, and W. Regehr (Fresno, CA: Center for Mennonite Brethren Studies, 2011), 318–324, https://archive.org/details/unionofcitizenso0000unse.

Note 8: “Conclusions of the Commission of the Presidium Commission following inspection of the Union of Citizens of Dutch Lineage, Late July 1925,” in J. Toews and P. Toews, Union of Citizens of Dutch Lineage, 291–296; 294.

Note 9: “Report of the German Section of the Zaporozhye Okrug Committee, January 4, 1926,” in J. Toews and P. Toews, Union of Citizens of Dutch Lineage in Ukraine, 324–329.

Note 10: Thieleman J. Van Braght, The Martyrs’ Mirror: The Story of Fifteen Centuries of Martyrdom (Scottdale, PA: Herald, 2001), 655f., https://archive.org/details/TheBloodyTheaterOrMartyrsMirrorOfTheDefenselessChristians/page/n653.

Note 11: Most famously a "Group of 12" Anabaptists were martyred in Bruges in 1561. A hymn was written to remember these “twelve friends killed in Bruges”; the entire story is sung in twelve verses and each martyr is individually named. Cf. hymn in Philipp Wackernagel, Lieder der niederländischen Reformierten aus der Zeit der Verfolgung im 16. Jahrhundert (Frankfurt, 1867), 130, https://reader.digitale-sammlungen.de/de/fs1/object/display/bsb10591883_00156.html.

---
To cite this post: Arnold Neufeldt-Fast, “Clothing the Naked Anabaptist,” History of the Russian Mennonites (blog), July 12, 2023, https://russianmennonites.blogspot.com/2023/07/clothing-naked-anabaptist.html.

Comments

Post a Comment

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...
Post a Comment
Read more

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, ...
Post a Comment
Read more

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 ...
Post a Comment
Read more

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...
1 comment
Read more

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...
Post a Comment
Read more

The Flight to Moscow 1929

In 1926, my grandfather’s sister Justina Fast (b. 1896) and her husband Peter Görzen moved from Krassikow, Neu Samara (Soviet Union) to village no. 5 Dejewka, Orenburg. “We thought we would live our lives here with our children secure in the hands of God. But the times were becoming turbulent,” Justina recalled. In May 1929 they travelled back to Krassikow for Pentecost to visit with her mother, brothers and their families. But when they returned to their home, she writes, “… a large quota of grain was demanded of us. But we had nothing, and the harvest was not yet in. Then we heard that many were planning to move to Canada, including my three siblings with my mother, and my husband's three sisters too. My husband decided to go to Moscow first to see if it was possible and what was required for emigration. We made the decision to leave when the harvest was complete. At that time so many people were leaving [for Moscow], and early in September we sold everything we had. Only the b...
Post a Comment
Read more

"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 ...
Post a Comment
Read more

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...
Post a Comment
Read more

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...
Post a Comment
Read more

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...
Post a Comment
Read more