Skip to main content

Farming as Religious Imperative? Quiet on the Land?

In 1847 agricultural scientist and Russia expert Baron August von Haxthausen reported that for the conservative Mennonites in Russia tilling the soil is a “religious duty from which no one is exempt except those with special need, for the Bible teaches: ‘By the sweat of your brow you will you cultivate the ground’” (note 1).

This same rationale for Mennonite farming is picked up in Friedrich Matthäi’s 1866 volume of German settlements in Russia (note 2).

The biblical reference is a composite of Genesis 3:17 and 3:23. God says to Adam: “Cursed is the ground because of you; through painful toil you will eat food from it all the days of your life” (3:17); and 3:23; God “banished him from the Garden of Eden to work the ground from which he had been taken.”

That perspective however was rooted neither in Mennonite tradition nor theology.

In the sixteenth century Flemish Anabaptists were largely urban; ability to read scripture was an imperative—not farming. While Genesis 3:17 is quoted in the 1632 Dordrecht Confession (note 3), no connection is made to agriculture.

Nor is farming mentioned in Danzig Flemish Elder Georg Hansen’s seventeenth-century Old Flemish Confession (note 4). He was a conservative and "patron saint" of the later Kleine Gemeinde (note 4). In Hansen’s suburban congregation in 1681, there are 114 Mennonites living in the city perimeter—38% of Mennonite house heads were retailers of “spirits” (note 6). This specialty is explained in part because Danzig Mennonites were hindered by law to full participation in public life.

Tilling the soil was also not thematic in the Prussian Short and Simple Statement of Faith (note 7) nor in the eighteenth-century Elbing Catechisms (note 8). And in contrast to Haxthausen, there is no Mennonite religious imperative for working the land based on “the Fall” and original sin. If Mennonite confessions or catechisms ever erred, it was typically in the opposite direction: most have an optimistic or positive views of human possibility in light of the new life in Christ. This trumped the power and implications of the Fall.

Twentieth-century Mennonite leader Benjamin Unruh never tired of reminding readers that Mennonites referred to themselves as the peaceful “quiet in the land” in contrast to the militant revolutionaries of Münster. The “quiet in the land”—die Stillen im Lande—is a posture and identity statement for the tradition of Menno, not a location on the land. Psalm 35:20 is the reference point; it speaks of those who live quietly in the land—no agricultural reference is intended.

Danzig elder Hansen’s goal was certainly to create a more rigorously separated, transformed “community of believers,” but not removed from the city. It was a retreat from the "public square" from ostentatious, showy attire, or activities like dancing. Whether one agrees with his strategy of church or not (he had his Mennonite critics), the goal was to be “a light to the world, to shine without fault,” to proclaim “his excellencies” while holding firmly “to the Word of life” and to each other in love as members of one body “to the end of the age” (note 9). The ban achieved this “outer quietness,” as one Dutch observer of Danzig noted in the mid-1700s. The concern of Hansen, much like later Danzig Elder Peter Epp or Elder Gerhard Wiebe in Elbing, was a pure and spotless church, as witness and pointer to the kingdom of God. This larger concern was rooted in the tradition of Menno Simons and Dirk Philips.

The invitation to settle in Russia from Georg von Trappe (agent for Catherine the Great) proposed the creation of “model agricultural settlements” of “excellent German farmers” to teach, to set a good example of sound management and to stimulate competition amongst neighbouring peoples and the New Russian peasantry (note 10).

Trappe encouraged his Mennonite colonists before they immigrated “to let your light shine in Russia before the people, that they may see your good works, and glorify your heavenly Father” (note 11). Trappe declared in an open letter his own pious conviction that this Mennonite migration to Russia was a special mission, “the work of the Almighty Creator” (note 12).

This would become the self-embraced sense of mission and identity of Russian Mennonites for more than a century—as model farmers, i.e., as a vehicle for witness.

The advice of Flemish Elder Gerhard Wiebe to those who would leave for Russia in 1788 summarizes the Polish-Prussian experience:

“… persevere in patience to the blessed consummation” and “keep low and be subject to the authorities of the land, even if they are harsh toward you. Strive to overcome evil with good. Protect yourself with your hard work so that you do not offend the ruling spiritual leaders. For they can be the first to make people hate you.” (Note 13)

Such are the “quiet in the land,” and this has nothing to do with a theological up-valuation of farming.

Jewish neighbours saw farming as a “bitter lot” for fallen humanity and largely unfitting for God’s “chosen people” (note 14). But for Mennonites, farming in Russia was an imperative based at best on the call in their charter/ Privilegium to be a model community, which overlapped with their sense as a faith community, to let their light shine helpfully before others. That is the thread back to Menno, not farming per se (note 15).

How did Haxthausen and Matthäi get it so wrong? Their claims are made as the landless crisis was becoming acute and no more than half of Mennonite families owned their own farm: Other kinds of pessimistic, confrontational politics were at play that obscured the longer Mennonite connection of vocation—rural or urban—to mission, not to the Fall.

            ---Arnold Neufeldt-Fast

---Notes---

Note 1: August von Haxthausen, Studien über die innern Zustände, das Volksleben und insbesondere die ländlichen Einrichtungen Rußlands, part II (Hannover: Hahn, 1847), 175; 184, https://archive.org/details/studienberdiein03kosegoog/page/n187.

Note 2: Friedrich Matthäi, Die deutschen Ansiedlungen in Rußland. Ihre Geschichte und volkswirthschaftliche Bedeutung (Leipzig: Fries, 1866), 223, http://www.digitalis.uni-koeln.de/Matthaeif/matthaeif_index.html.

Note 3: Dordrecht Confession; cf. “Fall of Man.” https://gameo.org/index.php?title=Dordrecht_Confession_of_Faith_(Mennonite,_1632)#II._Of_the_Fall_of_Man.

Note 4: Cf. doctrine of the “Fall of Adam and Justification” in Georg Hansen, Confession oder Kurtze und einfältige Glaubens-Bekänetenüsse derer Mennonisten in Preußen, so man nennet die Clarichen (N.p. 1678), http://pbc.gda.pl/dlibra/docmetadata?from=rss&id=35959.

Note 5: Klaas Reimer, founder of the Kleine Gemeinde in Russia, was encouraged by father-in-law Danzig Flemish Elder Peter Epp’s vision for emigration. Reimer deemed the Mennonite churches in Danzig and Prussia to be the hopelessly fallen “Babylon,” and believed that they could build an earthly model of the “New Jerusalem” on the Russian steppes. If Babylon is a city, so is the New Jerusalem. The core theme is mission and light—not a religious imperative to farming.

Note 6: Edmund Kizak, “A radical attempt to resolve the Mennonite question in Danzig in the mid-eighteenth century. The decline of the relations between the city of Danzig and the Mennonites,” translated by Camilla Badstubner-Kizik and Erwin Jost, Mennonite Quarterly Review 66, no. 2 (1992), 127–154; 134.

Note 7: Confession, or Short and Simple Statement of Faith (Rudnerweide, Russia, 1853). https://anabaptistwiki.org/mediawiki/index.php?title=Confession,_or_Short_and_Simple_Statement_of_Faith_(Rudnerweide,_Russia,_1853)&oldid=16196.

Note 8: Cf. “Fall of Man,” in Katechismus, oder kurze und einfältige Unterweisung aus der heiligen Schrift, in Frage und Antwort, fur die Kinder zum Gebrauch in den Schulen, including the 1837 foreword of the 8th Prussian edition (Berdjansk: Kylius, 1874), https://archive.org/details/cihm_90991/page/n5.

Note 9: Hansen, Confession oder Kurtze und einfältige Glaubens-Bekänetenüsse, 17–19, http://pbc.gda.pl/dlibra/docmetadata?from=rss&id=35959; with reference to Philippians 2:15; 1 Peter 2:9; Ephesians 4:16; Matthew 28:20. One Danzig family diary records how members of urban congregations were confronted on fashion choices that gave offence to other (rural?) congregations, including dressing gowns with otter muffs, use of wig powder, adoption of laces and ties over the usual boot buckle, canes with silver buttons, and pockets on the outside of men's coats. Excessive use of silverware and dancing at a wedding were matters for discipline, as well as drunkenness and a variety of sexual offences, but these were not limited to the city congregations. Cf. Waldemar H. Lehn, ed., “Lehn Diary,” 25; 15; 17; 19; 33; 35; 37; 41; 43; 45; 53. Transliteration from the gothic script and translation by Waldemar H. Lehn, 2010. From Mennonite Heritage Archive, Winnipeg, MB.

Note 10: Grigorii G. Pisarevskii, Izbrannye proizvedenija po istorii inostrannoj kolonizacii v Rossii [Selected works on the history of foreign colonization in Russia] (Edited by I.V. Cherkazyanova. Moscow: ICSU, 2011), 150, https://bibliothek.rusdeutsch.ru/catalog/860. [English selection: https://www.mharchives.ca/download/3422/]

Note 11: In David H. Epp, Chortitzer Mennoniten. Versuch einer Darstellung des Entwicklungsganges derselben (Odessa, 1889), 46, https://media.chortitza.org/pdf/Dok/Epp.pdf. This mission is consistent with Hansen’s 1678 Mennonite Confession.

Note 12: Pisarevskii, Izbrannye proizvedenija, 180f.

Note 13: Gerhard Wiebe, “Verzeichniß der gehaltenen Predigten samt andern vorgefallenen Merkwürdigkeiten in der Gemeine Gottes in Elbing und Ellerwald von Anno 1778 d. 1. Januar.” Transcriptions from the original by Willi Risto, https://media.chortitza.org/pdf/Buch/Risto1.pdf, pp. 182, 184.

Note 14: Cited in Dmytro Myeshkov, Schwarzmeerdeutschen und ihre Welten: 1781–1871 (Essen: Klartext, 2008), 343.

Note 15: On the larger theme of Mennonite farming, cf. Roydon Loewen, Mennonite Farmers: A Global History of Place and Sustainability (Baltimore: University of Johns Hopkins Press, 2021; Kindle). With reference to Genesis 1:28, Loewen helpfully notes (pp. 6f.) that "religious teaching permitted and even encouraged the cultivation of the soil ... and promised the cultivators of the soil cultural legitimacy, even spiritual meaning." Cf. also idem, “The Kleine Gemeinde as Sectarian Farmers, 1850-75,” in Delbert Plett, editor, Leaders of the Mennonite Kleine Gemeinde in Russia, 1812–1874, edited by Delbert Plett, 83-99 (Steinbach, MB: Crossway, 1993), https://www.mharchives.ca/download/1261/.

---
To cite this post: Arnold Neufeldt-Fast, “Farming as a Religious Imperative? Quiet on the land?,” History of the Russian Mennonites (blog), July 11, 2023, https://russianmennonites.blogspot.com/2023/07/farming-as-religious-imperative-quiet.html.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

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, ...

Flooding as a weapon of war, 1657

If a picture is worth a thousand words, then these maps speak volumes. In February 1657, the Swedish King Carolus Gustavus ordered an intentional breach of the embankments along the Vistula River to completely flood the villages of the Danzig Werder. See the vivid punctures and water flow in 1657 map below; compare with the 1730 maps with rebuilt villages and farms ( note 1 ). In Polish memory this war is appropriately remembered as "The Deluge". Villages in the Danzig Werder (delta) from which Mennonites immigrated to Russia include: Quadendorf, Reichenberg, Krampitz, Neunhuben, Hochzeit, Scharfenberg, Wotzlaff, Landau, Schönau, Nassenhuben, Mönchengrebin, and Nobel ( note 2 ). In the war the suburbs outside the gates of Danzig suffered most; Mennonites lived here in large numbers, e.g., in Alt Schottland and Stoltzenberg. First, these villages were completely razed by the City of Danzig to keep the invading Swedes from using the villages to their advantage in battle. ...

“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 ...

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...

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 ...

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 persecu...

1929 Flight of Mennonites to Moscow and Reception in Germany

At the core of the attached video are some thirty photos of Mennonite refugees arriving from Moscow in 1929 which are new archival finds. While some 13,000 had gathered in outskirts of Moscow, with many more attempting the same journey, the Soviet Union only released 3,885 Mennonite "German farmers," together with 1,260 Lutherans, 468 Catholics, 51 Baptists, and 7 Adventists. Some of new photographs are from the first group of 323 refugees who left Moscow on October 29, arriving in Kiel on November 3, 1929. A second group of photos are from the so-called “Swinemünde group,” which left Moscow only a day later. This group however could not be accommodated in the first transport and departed from a different station on October 31. They were however held up in Leningrad for one month as intense diplomatic negotiations between the Soviet Union, Germany and also Canada took place. This second group arrived at the Prussian sea port of Swinemünde on December 2. In the next ten ...

Immigration to Canada, 1923: Background

In April 1921 Mennonites in the Caucasus and Don Region officially petitioned Moscow for permissions to emigrate—which Lenin had “flatly refused.” Their rationale was more than economic. “The disruption of economic conditions leads to impoverishment, which again goes hand in hand with the degradation of morals and has an alarming impact on our youth, who are also constantly exposed to the pressure of brutal and ruthless agitation on the part of those in power. … This decay of our spiritual and economic goods will only become greater and more ruinous.” ( Note 1 ) Later that year and some months before the large-scale feeding operations could begin in the Soviet Union, American Mennonite Relief (AMR) commissioner A.J. Miller petitioned the Soviet Embassy in London for exit permissions for 20,000 Mennonites ( note 1b) . He was unsuccessful. Nonetheless in a highly secretive meeting in Ohrloff, Molotschna on February 7, 1922, key Mennonite leaders took a decision to work toward the re...

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...

What is the Church to Say? Letter 3 (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 Mennonite endorsement Trump the man No one denies the moral flaws of Donald Trump, least of all Trump himself. In these next months Mennonite pastors who supported Trump will have many opportunities to restate to their congregation and their children why someone like Trump won their support. It may be obvious, but the words can be difficult to find. To help, I offer examples from Mennonite history with statements from one our strongest leaders of the past century, Prof. Benjamin H. Unruh (see the nice Mennonite Encyclopedia article on him, GAMEO ). I have substituted only a few words, indicated by square brackets to help with the adaptation. The [MAGA] movement is like the early Anabaptist movement!  In the change of government in 1933, Unruh saw in the [MAGA] movement “things breaking forth which our forefathe...