MENNONITE LIFE DECEMBER 1990

C IV IL IA N PUBLIC SERVICE CAMP NO.5 ADMINISTERED BY Mennonife Central Committee In this Issue

Mennonite Life’s celebration of the fiftieth anniversary of the program of World War II began with the June issue of 1990. This issue continues that theme, giving attention both to the precedents for CPS and to the experiences of the three major “ historic churches,” the , Brethren, and Friends. This issue begins with a continuation of selections from the private journal of Paul Comly French, edited by Robert Kreider. French served as Executive Secretary of the National Service Board for Religious Objectors from 1940 to 1946. These excerpts provide brief glimpses into the qualities which some historic peace church leaders admired and deplored in each other as they faced the challenges of working with the Selective Service System in wartime. This issue also features four articles originally presented in April 1990 at a session of the 148th meeting of the American Society of Church History, held at Colorado State University, Fort Collins. Arthur J. Worrall, profes­ sor of history at Colorado State University and a scholar of Quaker history, organized and chaired the session. The session title was “ Peace Churches in 20th Century America.” The articles by James Juhnke of Bethel College and by Paul Toews of Fresno Pacific College grew out of research for the Mennonite Experience in America project. That project is producing a series of four volumes which survey Mennonite history in the United States. Volume three, by Juhnke, was published a year ago with the title Vision, Doctrine, War, Mennonite Identity and Organization in America, 1890-1930 (Herald Press). Volume four, by Toews, will include CPS and the World War II experience. The article in this issue gives an advance indication of Toews’ interpretive viewpoint. Robert C. Clouse, professor of history at Indiana University, shows the connection in the between the World War I experience and a post-war resolve by key church leaders to be better prepared for future military conflicts. Clouse has been active in the Conference on Faith and History and is the author of The Meaning o f the Millennium, among other volumes. Hugh S. Barbour’s paper, originally a commentary on three other papers, finds a number of insightful comparisons and contrasts among the Brethren, , and Mennonites in their peace witness. Barbour is a distinguished professor of history at Earlham College and the author of The Quakers in Puritan New England. James C. Juhnke

Indexed with abstracts in Religion Index One: Periodicals, American Theological Library Associa­ tion, Chicago, available online through BRS (Bibliographic Retrieval Services), Latham, New York and DIALOG, Palo Alto, California. MENNONITE

December 1990 Vol. 45 No. 4 LIFE

Editor A Journalist’s Private Reflections on James C. Juhnke the Mennonites 4 Book Review Editor edited by Robert S. Kreider John D. Thiesen Editorial Assistants “Will a New Day Dawn from This?” Barbara Thiesen Dale R. Schräg Mennonite Pacifist People and the Good War 16 Circulation Manager Stanley Voth Paul Toews

Front Cover Camp entrance to CPS t/5, Colorado Springs, Mennonites in World War I 25 Colorado. James C. Juhnke Back Cover Winter scene from CPS #55, Belton, Montana. The Church of the Brethren and Photo Credits World War I: The Goshen Statement 29 P. 4, Bruce Comly French; p. 14, Robert Kreider; p. 16, Associated Press; p. 24, Stan Voth; all Robert G. Clouse others Mennonite Library and Archives. Comparisons and Contrasts Among MENNONITE LIFE (ISSN 0025-9365) is an il­ lustrated quarterly magazine published in Historic Peace Churches 35 March, June, September, and December by Bethel College, 300 East 27th, North Newton, Kansas 67117. Second Class postage paid at Hugh S. Barbour North Newton, Kansas 67117. K)STMASTER: Send address changes to MENNONITE LIFE, Bethel College, 300 East 27th, North Newton, Kansas 67117. Book Reviews 37

SUBSCRIPTION RATES: U.S. - One year, $10.00; two years, $18.00. Foreign — One year, $11.00; two years, $20.00 (U.S. Funds). A Journalist’s Private Reflections on the Mennonites edited by Robert S. Kreider

As the year 1942 drew to a close, the problem of the new year was to respond There is the personal side: his weekend 39-year-old Executive Secretary of the to the Navy’s demand that the Powells- trips home to his family in Philadelphia, National Service Board for Religious ville, Maryland, CPS camp be closed the illness and death of his father, the Objectors (NSBRO) recorded in his because of a fear that a subversive illness and death of his wife, his read­ diary his observation of a train with four group of COs near the Atlantic coast ing, his personal devotional life. One ambulance cars bringing wounded to could communicate with German sub­ senses whom he considers his closest Walter Reed Hospital from the North marines. As he would agonize many friends and confidants: Joe Weaver, Africa war. With only a few Allied vic­ times in the next three and a half years, Mennonite and his right-hand man on tories in a triumphal year for the Axis, French contemplated resigning. the NSBRO staff; Raymond Wilson, French saw a long war ahead. He con­ This study focuses on Paul Comly Quaker and first director of the Friends fessed his weariness with the NSBRO’s French’s reflections on the Mennonites Committee for National Legislation; M. unequal encounters with Selective Serv­ whom he came to know for the first R. Zigler, Brethren Service Committee ice officials, the strains of working with time in the 1940s. As one reads the (BSC) and Chairman of the NSBRO; the church agencies and the restiveness 1000-page diary one finds many other and Orie Miller, Mennonite manufac­ of COs in the CPS base camps. His first lines of inquiry inviting inclusion. turer and Executive Secretary of the Mennonite Central Committee (MCC). He frequently tested his ideas with fellow Quaker Ray Newton, and others. In dozens of entries he recorded exas­ perating meetings with Clarence Pickett, Executive Secretary of the American Friends Service Committee (AFSC) and A. J. Muste of the Fellowship of Recon­ ciliation (FOR). French was troubled with Pickett’s go-it-alone style and Muste’s persistent call for the demoli­ tion of NSBRO collaboration with Selective Service. French often reflects his understanding of Mennonite per­ spectives on these issues. He commented candidly on his meet­ ings with national newsmakers and power-brokers: Eric Johnston, Presi­ dent of the U. S. Chamber of Com­ merce; John McCloy, Assistant Secre­ tary of War and rising star; Senator John Sparkman; Senator Robert Taft and his brother Charles Taft; Chief Justice Harland Stone; General William Donovan, director of the Manhattan Project; Robert Murphy of the State Department; Solicitor Francis Biddle; Mrs. Eleanor Roosevelt; Pearl Buck and many more. Politically shy Men­ nonites seem to have admired French’s easy camaraderie with the great and

MENNONITE LIFE near great. French, a journalist by pro­ broadening of the definition of con­ ships. . . . fession, had a gift for the succinct scientious objector, provision for the March 26, 1943 phrase and an ear for the quotable. absolutist, and an alternative service [In a discussion with Brethren, Beginning as early as September program of individual assignments with Friends, and Mennonite representatives 1942 French, with his ever restless and ample provision for overseas service. on the topic o f CPS training fo r foreign seminal mind, was testing and then ad­ French identifies Mennonite perspec­ service] I reported that General Hershey vocating a series of ideas for building tives on all the above issues. was willing to approve two percent of a more peaceful world: a Christian the total men in camp. John Nason Pacifist Party (Sept. 21, 1941), a Part II 1943-1946* [Friend and President o f SwarthmoreJ postwar international newspaper New took the position that it was hardly World (eight entries beginning July 19, In January 1943 the series of Axis victories were drawing to an end, Ger­ worth bothering with for so few. 1944) , a postwar many’s Sixth Army surrendered at Sta­ Elmore Jackson [AFSC] felt that (December 22, 1944), a conference of lingrad. U. S. and Australian forces took Clarence Pickett would feel that he must peace groups to effect a postwar carry the issue to General Hershey and organization (December 26, 1945), Buna, New Guinea, and soon Guadal­ insist that we be allowed to train 600 writing a book on the CPS experience canal. Rommel was in retreat in Tuni­ to 800 men [approximately 10per cent]. (April 10, 1945), sending ambassadors sia. In CPS men in large numbers were I explained that he felt that he could not of goodwill to seven countries (June 13, leaving base camps for newly-opened defend so many [CPS] men in col­ 1945) , the sense of call that he and Ray units in mental hospitals and other lege. . . . Orie Miller supported me in Newton should go to Moscow to see special projects. In mid-February Presi­ my suggestion we accept what we could Stalin (June 25, 1945, and six additional dent Roosevelt authorized a unit of 70 obtain now, as we had in the past, and entries), a domestic news service for CPS men for service in West China then work for an increased number of foreign language newspapers (July 12, with the British Friends Ambulance men when we had definite plans to place 1945), a Protestant inter-agency service Unit. Since he had secured approval for them in foreign service. . . . committee for overseas programming this project through his friendship with (January 7, 1946), a Washington Mrs. Roosevelt, Clarence Pickett saw March 31, 1943 newsletter (March 6, 1946), many of this as a Friends project. French urged Henry Fast [M X ], Harold Row the above with additional entries. In that appointments be shared with the [ESC], and Paul Furnas [AFSC] spent 1946 he was considering invitations to Brethren and Mennonites. some time expressing their dissatisfac­ overseas refugee camps in Europe and tion with the government’s inability North Africa for the Intergovernmen­ The China Unit—a Friends Project? and, I assume, the NSBRO’s, to make tal Refugee Committee, work with the February 27, 1943 everything run smoothly. . . . I find it American Friends Service Committee, . . . Clarence is still thinking in terms difficult to try to convince them of what continue as executive secretary of a of 1917 and 1918 when the [AFSC] was the situation is in Washington and that restructured NSBRO, and to become the only agency in the field. I wish there no one has any overall plan for any­ Director of CARE—the position he ac­ were some way to make him see that thing, including the war. cepted. He discussed his ideas for Brethren and Mennonites have pro­ April 13, 1943 postwar inter-church cooperation with gressed and developed and are just as Bob Zigler said he told Elmore Orie Miller, who appears to have given anxious as the Friends are to do postwar Jackson that he and Orie Miller were encouragement. relief work. . . . I can’t seem to make disturbed when Clarence attempted to The French diaries are filled with them understand that the Mennonites represent them in the relief setup. . . . observations on a long series of conflict- and Brethren don’t want to ride along He said that Clarence had asked for ten ridden issues: the struggle to reverse the with the Friends. They are anxious to men from the Brethren camps,and ten Congressional ban on overseas service handle their own relief program without men from the Mennonite camps for the for CPS men, abrupt decisions of Selec­ trailing the Friends. China Unit while he planned to use fifty tive Service without consulting the from the Friends camps. . . . NSBRO and invariably Selective Serv­ March 8, 1943 ice backtracking, the disposition of A plan was announced to have 1,300 April 19, 1943 frozen funds most of which were earned men assigned to dairy farms and other Paul Furnas said that they would by Mennonite men in farm assignments, agricultural work and close out most of much prefer to operate alone. He said demobilization plans, government the Soil Conservation Service units. that they understood that in this situa­ camps and Selective Service’s procliv­ John Swomley, who represented the tion it was necessary to work together ity to make arbitary camp transfers, FOR, felt we should flatly refuse to ac­ and that he, personally, because of his agency withdrawals from the NSBRO cept the new work, while Orie Miller belief in the deep religious motivation at the war’s end, and the response of said that Mennonites would do it if the of both the Mennonites and Brethren the churches to postwar . government insisted. was desirous of doing so. On the latter, French gives no evidence March 9, 1943 April 20, 1943 of wanting a repetition of the CPS ex­ . . . The group discussed the China Orie Miller called in the evening to periment. His preferred response- Unit and Clarence asked for the coop­ talk to me about the CPS Training shared by Mennonites, Brethren, and eration of the Mennonites and Brethren Corps and expressed the opinion that he some Quakers—seems to have been a in the way that I wished we had been would prefer not to go with Clarence strong case against conscription, a able to work in all of our relation­ and Nason to see Hershey about more

DECEMBER, 1990 5 again and he said, if that was correct, he thought the men would be willing to work in the fields.

Frustration with Selective Service

May 19, 1943 Paul Furnas, Orie Miller, Bob Zigler, and I spent three hours on the problems of Selective Service. It was finally agreed that I should tell General Her- shey that many of our problems in the past resulted, in our opinion, from hav­ ing men who did not want to be under religious controlled administration; that we felt with the opening of a govern­ ment camp we would be able to operate on the basis of our original agreement with Clarence Dykstra in 1940, and that unless we would return to that agree­ Topping beets ai CPS H33, Ft. Collins, Colorado. ment, it was our judgment that the Historic Peace Churches had better withdraw from the program. . . . As Orie Miller said, we would do the best men. He said that they were satisfied conscientiously unable to do. 1 called we could in our way and if it wasn’t with the number available now and Kosch and told him and for once even good enough, General Hershey, a were willing to accept my judgment as Imirie [Selective Service] was stopped. public official, would have to determine to the right time to press for additional I think that we made more progress with the next move. I have the feeling that persons. Selective Service by Orie’s approach if Hershey knew there is unanimity of than by any other way. There is an atti­ April 26, 1943 opinion, we probably can work out the tude of humility in it which seems to im­ difficulties, although it may be that we Joe Weaver said that he is ready to press army people with much more ef­ resign because he is convinced that-he are coming close to the end of our fectiveness than the agressiveness that experiment. can’t get what the agencies [AFSC, some of the rest of us show. Apparently BSC, and MCC] want us to get and that Kosch had called Henry Abbott of Soil June 1, 1943 they will not be satisfied with anything Conservation Service because he called Met Orie Miller . . . and together we second hand from us. . . . He doesn’t me and said that none of the beets were went to Wallingford to talk with Clar­ mind being under pressure from either used for anything but human consump­ ence Pickett and Paul Furnas about Selective Service or the agencies, but tion and that he felt that the boys did Clarence’s letter to the President. . . . he isn't up to taking pressure from both not understand this. I talked with Orie Orie asked [Pickett] if he felt that he sides much longer. I agree with him. would rather deal independently with the government and not through the Mennonites Refuse to Thin Beets Service Board, because he said it seemed to him that was the basic prob­ May 13, 1943 lem involved in whether we were fac­ Colonel Lewis F. Kosch [Selective ing the question cooperatively or inde­ Service] called me this afternoon and pendently. Clarence said he felt sorry said forty-five Mennonites had refused Hershey was upset about his visit to the to thin beets at Fort Collins and wanted President, but that he would have to to know what we proposed to do about continue to do it. . . . it. I talked with Orie and he said the men had the understanding that the June 2, 1943 beets were made into alcohol for mili­ Meeting with [Selective Service and tary purposes and thus they felt unable mental hospital officials]. . . . The to do the work. He said to explain to Mennonite operations in the hospital Kosch that they were very sorry this had area had a lot to do with the successful happened, but they would support the working out of the meeting because boys in their attitude. He said to tell both Virginia and New Jersey expressed Kosch that they were willing to move real satisfaction over the way they had the camp at once if he wanted to, or it been able to deal with the MCC. Dr. was satisfactory with them if he felt the Zeller from Byberry [Hospital] in boys should go to jail, but they would Philadelphia expressed the same feel­ not ask them to do something they felt Orie Miller ing about the Friends.

6 MENNONITE LIFE An Afternoon with Mrs. Roosevelt

June 8, 1943 Went to the White House this after­ noon to see Mrs. Roosevelt. . . . I urged that men from the Brethren and Mennonite camps be given the same chance in the Near East and South America as the Friends had received in China. She agreed to discuss it with Nelson Rockefeller. . . . I got the im­ pression that she felt that Clarence Pickett actually represented all of the groups when he talked with her about CPS men. She said that she had heard excellent reports about the work the Mennonite men had performed in men­ tal hospitals. June 17, 1943 Had lunch with Orie Miller. We had a two hour discussion on the problems of working together and the difficulties that I had with our administrative rela­ Electric shock therapy, CPS ft63, New Jersey State Hospital, Marlboro. tionship with the Friends. He said that sorbed in efforts to secure a withdrawal Friends or Brethren camps. . . . [The he had been watching it and understood o f the amendment and then after Friends] have been receiving 50 to 60 how difficult it had been, but felt that passage to find alternatives, but to no thousand dollars a year from the Men­ it would be better if I stopped worry­ avail. ] nonites [to operate their camps]. ing about it. I told him that I had sent September 24, 1943 my resignation to Bob Zigler and we Pressing for New Projects discussed it. Orie said that he had Bob and I discussed again the unifica­ learned from long experience that prob­ tion idea [NSBRO, AFSC, BSC, and MCC integrated in one body to admin­ October 16, 1943 lems could not be solved by walking Clarence urged that we make a real away from them. . . . He is an amazing ister CPS] and also talked about Orie issue with General Hershey over assign­ person and it did me no end of good to Miller’s statement yesterday that after ing men to social service and juvenile talk with him. . . . He said that all have the first of the year the Mennonites delinquency problems. Both Orie Miller to work on the basis of our traditions were prepared to take one third of the unaffiliated or non-peace church boys, and Bob Zigler said they were not pre­ and experiences and that the Friends did pared to make an issue over these two things one way and the Mennonites but were not prepared to continue pay­ points, although they were prepared to another. No one could tell, he added, ing one third for those who went to which was best because each way was best for each group. He said that he had the highest regard for Clarence Pickett and felt he was one of the few men who really understood the Mennonite prob­ lem. I had suggested to him and Bob that Clarence represent all of the groups in terms of the White House and in working for foreign projects. . . .

Ban on Overseas CPS Service

June 24, 1943 The House Appropriations Committee tacked on a provision to the War De­ partment bill making it impossible for them to use any of their funds for COs. [This was the Starnes Amendment, later passed by Congress, which halted the China program and cancelled training programs for postwar relief service. In the weeks following, French was ab- Staff meeting at CPS ft63, Marlboro, New Jersey.

DECEMBER, 1990 7 support the Friends in their desire for tionships with Selective Service with a could develop some confidence. I sug­ this type of project. . . . Orie Miller basic humility and sensitiveness that we gested that my resignation might help. suggested that he would keep quiet in should have as followers of Christ. . . . He felt that it would because he said the the evening session at certain points to If . . . we are able to carry through, we AFSC thought that I was trying to build preserve unity and A. J. Muste said he will have demonstrated that there is a large organization here and that I would do the same for the FOR. There something in the power of goodwill and would have more personal power and was a general feeling of agreement, understanding. And we will have dem­ prestige. He said that many of the peo­ although 1 am sure the Mennonites and onstrated that conscription cannot make ple in Philadelphia felt that Barry Brethren do not basically agree with the a man a conscript any more than Roman Hollister should have my place. . . . Friends in their feeling that they would slave laws could make the early Chris­ Barry said that he was satisfied that my have to withdraw from the program if tians slaves. We have a chance—it may resignation would not affect the basic some of the Friends provisions were not be the last for a long time in the kind problem of confidence, because it was accepted. of centralizing state that is ahead—to mainly the AFSC feeling that they demonstrate that freedom is within a would operate independently but did not October 17, 1943 man and has no relationships to any ex­ believe that it was possible. . . . Dave The Friends feel that they were tak­ ternal pressures. Dave Swift [AFSC] said that Paul Furnas gave the staff the ing a load from the shoulders of the has admirably expressed this point of feeling that both Bob Zigler and Orie government in handling conscientious view in this week’s Friends Intelli­ Miller supported them in their attitude objectors, and they are ready to con­ gencer. about the NSBRO. 1 doubt it, because tinue doing it provided they have the 1 think that both of them would say so October 25, 1943 same opportunity of engaging in the to me directly. . . . forms of service which they feel are It is always a pleasure to work with essential. The Mennonites, on the other Orie Miller. He has such a direct mind November 24, 1943 hand, I think, feel that the government and goes to the root of the problem. Had an extremely nice letter from is being generous in permitting COs to Both he and Bob said that they were Bob Zigler today. . . . He very kindly engage in alternative service and is ac­ prepared to accept men from Friends said that I was the only non-Brethren tually going the second mile by allow­ camps, if they wished to come in with the exception of Orie Miller, who ing religious groups to participate in this preference to going to Mancos [« he felt the Brethren would be willing to service. General Hershey, and I think government camp in Colorado], and felt have here as their representative. that the men should be told that it was the majority of the others in government December 2, 1943 with whom we have worked, are in­ one of the alternatives which they might Bob and Orie were satisfied with the consider. I am more and more im­ clined to have about the same feeling way NSBRO was being handled. . . . pressed with Orie and his simple faith. as I think the Mennonites and Brethren He said that he had the feeling that most He sees more closely than most of us have. This basically makes the diffi­ of our problem dated back to the early culty. . . . Orie Miller and Bob Zigler what is really involved in this program days when Clarence Pickett suggested and how we cannot let it fall apart. . . . [seeing the expansion o f service oppor­ that the AFSC would run the whole pro­ tunities in two years o f CPS] feel that gram and the Mennonites and Brethren we can likely continue to make progress Hard to Understand the Mennonites could “ cooperate” with the Service as we earn the right to such opportuni­ Committee. Neither Bob nor Orie felt ties. They would prefer not to make a November 22, 1943 they could “ cooperate” with the yearly issue with General Hershey. The Bill Ackerman, who is now at Grot­ Friends running the program, but were Friends, with a much more articulate toes [MCC camp in Virginia], was in willing to cooperate in a central constituency behind them, feel that they this afternoon and we talked about the organization. I am inclined to think must make concrete and definite ad­ attitudes of. the various conservative there is some truth in what he says. vances to hold the support of Friends.... Mennonites there. He found them hard Personally, I would be inclined to move December 31, 1943 to understand and felt that many of these forward by degrees of progress and not Talked with Colonel Kosch this either ask or expect General Hershey to men accepted their position simply morning about approving the Brethren make clear cut commitments regarding because it was church teachings, and clothing-heifer project as work of na­ hardly knew why. We had an interest­ the type of service we could perform. tional importance. . . . If it were just ing discussion about the ability of a I think that people not close to the the Brethren or the Mennonites, I think Washington situation fail to understand group like the Mennonites to retain their he would approve it, but seems loath to position and he felt that they could do the pressures under which government approve such a project for the Friends, it only as long as they were able to people work. . . . I know the obstacles and here is where the results of the two we face in working with Kosch and A. maintain closed communities. I think years of administrative difficulties come S. Imirie [Selective Service] with their that is likely correct and that is the to light. The Brethren and Mennonites thinking based on their Civilian Con­ reason that some of the Mennonite have developed satisfactory relation­ servation Corps background; yet it groups are disturbed about their boys ships, and thus, when a project of this seems to me that if our belief has any mixing with others in CPS. . . . type comes along, they have a fair meaning, we must learn how to see their November 23, 1943 chance of having it approved. position and how to work with them.... Dave Swift came in and we spent two I wonder at times whether we have real­ hours talking about the AFSC-NSBRO ly approached our problems and rela­ relationships and considering how we

8 MENNONITE LIFE Cooking school, CPS #4, Grottoes, Virginia.

Back to the Farm wanted pay for those who wanted it, but March 6, 1944 January 20, 1944 wanted to make sure that such provisions Spent the day at Big Flats [AFSC Had breakfast with Ernest Miller would not limit their group in making camp in New York State]. Had a conver­ [Mennonite and President o f Goshen their testimony without pay. . . .It was sation with Zucker who attempted to College] this morning and discussed the generally felt that we should seek a secure court action on the pay ques­ demobilization problem and some of the register of COs, a broader interpreta­ tion. . . . I remarked . . . that Men­ factors within the Mennonite consti­ tion of definition of , provi­ nonites felt that court action was the tuency that make the rural settlement sions for dependents and for compensa­ thing that a Christian did not do. They idea so important to Winfield Fretz and tion insurance, a clearly non-military felt, I said, that you talked with those Orie Miller. I expressed the opinion that direction. who you felt were unfair to you, but if

many of the men would not be inter­ February 22, 1944 — ested in going back to the farms and Don Smucker [Mennonite pastor and Ernest Miller agreed but said because former FOR staff member] was in this of the internal problems in their groups afternoon. He has been visiting a they had to work along that line. number of the camps to present his January 28, 1944 “ modern” version of the Mennonite I wish there were some way for non-resistance attitude. He said that he Friends to appreciate that they represent had been much disturbed by the attitude the smallest third in the total of the of A. J. Muste and Evan Thomas [ War Historic Peace Church CPS and to real­ Resisters League] toward CPS and felt ize the place the others play in the total that they were undermining the whole program. . . . Mennonites have actually pacifist program. . . . Don’s ideas paid about half of the total costs of CPS about political versus religious pacifists since its inception. set me to thinking along a new track. The more I see of the way we act and February 18, 1944 react toward each other, the more I The Council on Civilian Service met become convinced that he may be on the this morning. . . .W ith the exception right road and there is no real hope of of the , Mennonites, permanent peace until men actually and Seventh Day Adventists, all present change their personal attitude. felt that an attempt should be made to halt the passage of any postwar con­ Going to Court for CPS Pay scription bill. . . . The Mennonites Donovan Smucker

DECEMBER, 1990 9 you could not make them see your posi­ and leaders of the United Church of men from service. He felt very strongly tion, you did not carry it to the courts. Canada, the FOR and political and that their groups might have consider­ Of course, the idea seems utterly unreal economic CO groups. He felt that I able difficulty after the war when Cana­ to him. would not get a complete picture unless dian troops returned from overseas be­ I followed through with these other cause there was no indication that they April 3, 1944 groups. He also said that he felt it would had much of a sacrifice for their beliefs. The Board met in Pittsburgh to con­ be excellent if I could go to England and He said their leaders all strongly fav­ sider my resignation. . . . Orie Miller get a first hand picture of their situa­ ored men being in camps so that they said that he hoped that I would feel able tion so that I could really speak with could continue religious instruction. . . . to continue on the basis of the points authority before Congress when they The Mennonite leaders with whom I they had outlined and that we were all consider postwar conscription. talked said that many of the Mennonite of the same people who had started out farmers objected strenuously to paying together three and a half years ago. He May 12, 1944 their boys $25 a month and thought it said that if I had the feeling that they The Canadian system is certainly was quite unfair. . . . C. F. Klassen had lost confidence in me and the staff, more flexible and considerate of the in­ [Canadian Mennonite leader] said that it was the duty of both of us to regain dividual, but certainly lacking in an ele­ for more than five years, since the that confidence in me and the staff. . . . ment of group testimony against war.... beginning of the war, he had been try­ [All] agreed. . . .Orie made one state­ ing to work out a plan for some kind ment that made me feel badly. He said Visit to MCC Headquarters, Akron of central committee to deal with the that at times he had almost felt like government but that so far he had been apologizing for being a Mennonite, May 30, 1944 unable to get even the Mennonites to Spent the day at Akron, Pa., at the when talking with some of the men in work together. our office. It was directed,-1 think, prin­ MCC and went over the administrative cipally at the Information Section. I breakdown. I had the feeling that the July 11, 1944 assured him that we all had the greatest office was run more efficiently than the Meetings with Friends in Canada----- respect for him and thought, but did not Friends office in Philadelphia but that It had been noticed that Mennonites in say, that I believed that the staff had all of the various functions seemed to general did not feel that they had any more respect for him than for any other be merged in the kind of a setup that particular rights as COs, nor did they member of the Board. Col. Kosch is most critical about. usually feel the sense of social obliga­ Talked with Orie at some length about tion many pacifists feel. A Look at it and he asked me to give them a de­ Canadian Alternative Service tailed analysis of their operations. The National Mental Health June 13, 1944 Foundation May 10, 1944 In Manitoba I talked with J. F. Bark- Met Orie Miller at Montreal, Can­ man of Steinbach. . . . He said that July 28, 1944 ada. . . . We discussed the attitude of their group felt in general that the Spent the morning [in Philadelphia] the various Mennonite groups in the money they were paying the Canadian with Albert Gaeddert and Bob Kreider event that we have postwar conscription Red Cross for boys on their own farms of the MCC and Len Edelstein and Phil in the U.S. Orie said that some of their was in reality a tax for the release of people—he had no idea how many— Steer [the CPS-based National Mental would follow the example of the Ger­ Health Foundation] discussing the men­ man and Dutch Mennonites and accept tal hygiene program. Albert and Bob military service. He said that some were both felt that it was worthwhile program doing it now. Another group, the larg­ and expressed their hope that Mennon­ est, he thought, would work for some ite hospital and training school units type of alternative service and would try would be included. Albert felt that the to preserve their nonresistant testimony. MCC would be willing to help finance The third part, he felt the smallest, the necessary expenses. would likely migrate to some country August 2, 1944 like Mexico or Paraguay where they Spent the afternoon and evening with could be assured of freedom from the Mennonite CPS unit at Howard, conscription. . . . Rhode Island. It is a good bunch of men [French reported extensively o f his and they have about thirty-five wives visits with Canadian Mennonite leaders and women volunteers working with and his probing o f the fiinctioning o f the them. . . . About 100 persons attended Canadian alternative service system.] the evening session. About a third of the Hutterite com­ munities refuse to follow assignments September 9, 1944 of Alternative Service officers while Representatives of AFSC, BSC, and about two-thirds cooperate. . . . Orie MCC met in Washington at the Church felt that I should talk with some of the of the Brethren to discuss and exchange men who had served in the Canadian views on postwar conscription. Friends camps, men on' individual assignments C. F. Klassen seem to want to oppose it and appear

10 MENNONITE LIFE not willing to discuss an alternative service program, while both Brethren and Mennonites are opposed to it, but want to see a satisfactory program worked out if conscription is approved. September 23, 1944 Raymond Wilson sent me a draft of the proposed letter to President Roose­ velt opposing conscription after the war which will be signed by Orie Miller, Clarence Pickett, and Rufus Brown [Brethren].

Postwar Conscription

September 26, 1944 Orie Miller, Harold S. Bender, M. R. Zigler, and I talked with Kosch and Imirie about postwar conscription. Orie told them that Mennonites were op­ posed to it, but that if the Congress passed such legislation they wanted to One o f the CPS wives in the female ward, Rhode Island State Hospital. CPS If 85, Howard, Rhode Island. see an alternative service program. He said that they expected to have about the meeting Orie Miller urged me to be pected to do about men who had gone 1,000 men a year if farm and physical very careful in how I discussed peace­ into the military service. . . . He said exemptions were eliminated and that time conscription with government offi­ that they were especially interested in they thought about 75 to 80 percent of cials so that there would be no thought the men who had decided they had made their people would be from rural that I was speaking officially for any of a mistake but who still wanted to secure areas. . . . Kosch made a rather strong the groups. After the meeting I asked the benefits of the GI Bill of Rights. statement that Selective Service felt that Bob Zigler whether I had said anything January 30, 1945 church groups should have no part in that embarassed the Mennonites and he Board met in Washington. . . . Henry the program and that it should be entire­ told me that that statement by Orie was ly a government-administered plan. Dyer [CPS man] attended the meeting made at the request of the Friends. and explained the plan on which he is Orie told him that if that resulted on the November 24, 1944 basis of their experience over the last working to secure presidential approval Just finished an interesting book by for individual [assignments] and more 400 years, two-thirds of the Mennonites would leave the U.S. and migrate to Guy Hershberger on the biblical basis useful work. We all agreed with his Canada, Mexico, and Paraguay. of the Mennonite posi­ motives and Orie Miller said that it was tion. An excellent job. possible the Lord might use him to ac­ October 7, 1944 complish some things we had not been December 5, 1944 I talked with Albert Gaeddert at Akron able to do. and he told me.that . . . they would Marie [wife o f Paul French] passed take Powellsville or Big Flats [AFSC on at 9:30 this morning, quietly and February 27, 1945 without pain. Paul Furnas, M. R. Zigler., Orie camps]. . . . I wish that I could get Paul Furnas to see that the Brethren and December 26, 1944 Miller, and I met in Lancaster today.... Mennonites are making a generous ges­ I had a beautiful letter today from Orie Miller expressed the opinion that we were moving down the road toward ture to help Friends financial problems. Henry Fast about Marie. general regimentation and that we must January 4, 1945 decide whether we were planning to Aid to CPS Dependents Joe Weaver told me this afternoon take on that problem as a major objec­ that the MCC had asked him to head up tive. He said that the Mennonites, he November 18, 1944 their postwar colonization work. He felt sure, would not try to engage in that Orie Miller reported that he and Bob said that they expected a number of fight but would concentrate on provid­ Zigler had talked with Paul Furnas and Mennonites to come from Europe and agreed to help our dependency problem ing exemptions for conscience in the Asia and felt that there might be many [need cases among dependents o f CPS various laws that he felt might be ahead thousands of Mennonites leaving this men] by sharing on a three-way basis of us. He expressed the opinion that he country if peacetime conscription was with all the non-Historic Peace Church felt that it was possible that some lead­ adopted. men and that they had further agreed to ing general might move into complete handle it through the Friends office for January 16, 1945 executive authority and set up a military dictatorship. . . . men in Friends camps. It seems to me Chris Gräber was in to talk about that this is an extremely generous ges­ some of their postwar plans and particu­ ture on their part. Toward the end of larly what the Mennonite Church ex­

DECEMBER, 1990 11 Colonel Kosch’s Secret general agreement that withdrawal from men should be informed o f the firebomb administrative responsibility should be situation before volunteering to go March 29, 1945 considered only as a last resort. West.] I find it disturbing to see how little April 27, 1945 June 5, 1945 understanding Colonel Kosch has of our Spent an hour with General Hershey Had breakfast with Orie Miller and philosophy and ideals. . . . Today par­ discussing the West Coast fire situation. talked about world developments. . . . ticularly when he suggested there was He said that the War Department had He says that he has found that an indi­ some very secret and mysterious reason requested additional help because of the vidual can do little to change the pat­ back of the West Coast transfers, that Japanese bombs and that the basic rea­ terns of life and therefore it is better to we would some day understand, seemed son was military necessity! I told him live calmly and not let changes disturb patronizing and to give the impression of our concerns. . . . He agreed that it you, but to have faith that the Lord that wc were not considered enough was a real problem. . . . He said he was knows what he is doing and that things part of the program to warrant being not sure what commitments Colonel will work out to His satisfaction in His consulted. Kosch had made to the War Department own good time. It is hard for me to ac­ | On an investigatory trip to the West but would discuss. . . . He felt one of cept things without attempting to do Coast French learned o f the threat that the major problems was to find out something about them, but perhaps he Japanese airborne incendiary bombs whether it was being handled entirely gets more happiness out of life than I do. dropping on coastal areas could be­ as a military matter or whether the For­ come more extensive and cause thou­ est Service was actually responsible.... sands of forest fires.] I told him that Orie Miller had sug­ Mennonites from Russia Met with Orie Miller, Lou Schneider gested that men might be transferred in Western Europe [AFSC], Harold Row, and Joe Weaver from the coast to other church units if for five hours of discussion at the La they felt unable to continue. . . . He July 11, 1945 Salle Hotel [Chicago] on the West asked how many people knew about Lunch with M. R. Royce [Office of Coast fire situation. . . . After much what I had discovered and again sug­ Strategic Services] and Rupert Emer­ talk, Orie said he was prepared to tell gested we had been wise in not discuss­ son. . . . I talked about the Mennonites Selective Service that we had received ing it any further. brought out of Russia by the Germans information which made us think there and their desire to come to Canada. were new factors in the West Coast April 28, 1945 Emerson said that he had a confidential transfers but that he was willing to ac­ Talked with Orie Miller at Goshen copy of the Yalta conversations and that cept the move in good faith after mak­ and reported on my conversation with Stalin had made a major point that all ing these points clear. He thought we General Hershey. Orie felt that we Soviet nationals must be returned to should tell General Hershey that we should go ahead in the faith that we Russia regardless of their personal could not function under military direc­ could work out the problems as they desires. He said that he understood that tion, would not fight fires in war or developed on the West Coast. [French some of our military people were not munitions plants and wanted assurance learned that the fire fighting would be following the provision in individual that men unable to fight fires caused by under the Forest Service. There was cases, but he thought it would be a real Japanese bombs could be transferred to consensus among the church agencies problem to ignore several thousand peo­ MCC camps or units. . . . There was that they would cooperate, but that CPS ple in one specific group. . . . Talked with Harold Bender at Goshen and sug­ gested that they should move with some speed if they wanted to be helpful to the Russian Mennonites now in Germany. July 16, 1945 Called Harold Bender in Goshen this evening and suggested that it might be possible to get Roy Hendrickson at UNRRA to help us get someone into Germany to see about the Mennonites from Russia who are there. July 20, 1945 [The last entry on the West Coast firebomb issue] Colonel Kosch said that our men were acting as foremen for soldiers, marines, sailors, and civilians because they had training in fire fighting and that forestry people said they were doing an excellent job. . . . Talked with Roy Hendrickson about the Mennonites brought out of Russia Fighting fire at CPS #35, North Fork, California. by the Germans and asked for his aid

12 MENNONITE LIFE in preventing their return to the Soviet Union. He said that UNRRA had noth­ ing to do with displaced persons at the present time as a result of the insistence of Stalin at Yalta that only military per­ sonnel handle displaced persons. He said that he understood that Stalin felt that civilian agencies would not follow the letter of the agreement. Hendrick­ son suggested that I arrange to talk with General Holdring, head of the Civil Af­ fairs Section of the War Department, and felt that it might be possible to secure favorable action in Washington. He said that our relations with the Rus­ sians were so delicate that he doubted if any army officers in the field would be willing to make any decision counter to the Yalta agreement. He said that he felt that both our army and the British would object to sending persons back to countries over their objection. August 7, 1945 Smoke jumper at CPS #103, Missoula, Montana. [A broadly representative group of we should think about it once more and churchmen met in Washington to dis­ more spiritual harm to them than sim­ ply to forget it. then forget it because he felt it would cuss alternative service in event of do us more harm spiritually than worry­ peacetime conscription.]. . . . P. C. November 16, 1945 ing about whether we were going to get Hiebert felt the Mennonites could not Had an interesting discussion with the million dollars. This seems to be a accept a proposal which indicated ap­ Orie Miller before the Board meeting typical Mennonite and Quaker reaction proval of the I-AO position and Carlyle in Philadelphia today about his trip to to a million dollars. Haynes of the Seventh Day Adventists Europe and the Near East and China. felt their group would not accept a draft He feels definitely that we are in for December 10, 1945 which implied approval of the 4-E twenty to twenty-five years of very dif­ Joe Weaver told me that Orie Miller position. ficult times and, as he describes it, the was much put out by an action of James whirlwind has yet to come and it is a Vail [AFSC] at the meeting of the Coun­ October 7, 1945 grave question whether the minority cil for Voluntary Agencies last week in Paul Furnas [suggested] that all men groups will be able to survive the cen­ New York City when Vail secured in CPS be released regardless of whether tralizing pattern which is evolving. He Council approval for two AFSC repre­ men in the armed forces were held on said that he feels quite definitely that sentatives to go to Germany as an offi­ the grounds that we were in a different capitalism is a thing of the past and that cial commission for the Council to sur­ category from the soldiers and sail­ no Congressional legislation will be vey relief needs. Orie felt, Joe reported, ors. . . . Albert Gaeddert [MCC] had able to revive something which is that the Mennonites, Brethren, and disagreed on the ground that such a sug­ already finished. . . . He discussed Catholics should have been represented. gestion implied not only equality of [peacetime conscription] with Friends treatment but also preferential han­ dling. . . . in Europe and they all felt that conscrip­ Moving Away from tion was coming all over the world and November 13, 1945 that an alternate program was essential January 4, 1946 Had an interesting memorandum pre­ under it. . . . Orie said that he hoped that Paul Fur­ pared by Robert Kreider of the MCC Both Bob Zigler [who had just re­ nas would make sure that someone in proposing the establishment of an MCC turned from Europe] and Orie feel that the AFSC office understood the three- Student Center in Europe to train men many of the points being discussed in way commitment to See the CPS his­ for postwar Mennonite leadership. It this country when they returned were of tory, which I am to write, was accepted certainly reads like a good idea. little importance against the need and so that there would be no question about starvation of a continent. . . . Elmore it after Paul left the AFSC. Thawing the Frozen Fund Jackson said that about one third of the Talked about the Atlantic City Con­ AFSC had now reached the point where ference [of peace groups] and Orie said November 15, 1945 they felt it was necessary to talk in that the Mennonites were beginning to Executive directors [met] in Philadel­ terms of an alternative service program realize that they had to move away from phia to discuss frozen fund. . . . Albert in the event of conscription. . . . their isolationism, but did not know Gaeddert [said] that the Mennonites, I was much interested in Orie Miller’s how to do it and at the same time pre­ who earned most of it, felt that any ag­ comment on the frozen fund at the serve some of the values of their small gressive attempt to secure it would do Board meeting. . . . Orie thought that rural communities. He said that many

DECEMBER, 1990 13 Joe Weaver Resigned

February 2, 1946 Joe Weaver resigned yesterday to go to Kansas to take charge of a new coop­ erative enterprise being organized by Mennonites. . . . I am going to miss his help and even temper. After giving Five years, however, he has every right to think of what he should be doing and the job appears to be just made for him. February 12-14, 1946 [Atlantic City conference o f leaders of peace groups to plan postwar joint efforts] Came out with an agreement on the part of all . . . to recommend to their boards cooperation and financial support for the four items proposed and for the Consultative Peace Council.. .. I was much encouraged by the Mennon­ ite attitude and their willingness to come as far as they did. The past five years of the NSBRO have seen a wide ad­ vance for them in terms of cooperative efforts with other groups. . . . On the way back to Washington Joe Weaver and I talked about Mennonite participa­ tion. He felt that they, as well as the Brethren, would be more happy about joining the united effort if I acted as the executive.

Relaxed about the Russians

March 4, 1946 Had an interesting talk with Orie Mil­ ler this morning about world problems. He feels that it is not very important whether the Russians assume control of Europe and Asia. He thinks that if their plans are good, they will last, but if they are evil they will fall apart. He has the feeling that we spend too much time worrying about things that the Lord can better take care of anyway and that we Joe Weaver and Paul Comly French. would all be better off working on the of them knew that they were in an legislative understanding of the prob­ problems we can solve and doing our atomic age and that they would have to lems and the need to increase wages, share in bringing a better world and work with other groups to a greater ex­ shorten hours, and elevate the profes­ helping the Lord’s plans for his people. tent than they had in the past. sional standards of attendants. He certainly has complete [confidence] that things will work out as the Lord January 9, 1946 February 1, 1946 wants and that we should have more Robert Kreider and Claude Shotts Board of Directors meeting. . . . I faith in the ultimate attainment of His went over the problems to be discussed was interested in Orie Miller’s obser­ plans and less for the immediate prob­ with the Virginia Mental Hospital Con­ vations that Mennonites were unable to lems that seem so pressing. trol Board in Richmond tomorrow and consider withdrawal [from CPS admin­ we agreed on a general presentation of istration1 while Mennonite boys were May 29, 1946 the problems that we had faced during drafted. It seems to me his position is The Board met in Washington to­ the past three and a half years. I urged correct and that little is accomplished day. . . . I am always intrigued by Orie that care be taken not to place blame by walking out on a problem. Miller’s quiet way of stating the Men­ principally on the hospital superinten­ nonite position and his half-apology for dents, but to stress the need for greater not being as aggressive as others are.

14 MENNONITE LIFE He said today that he could not fight the Today ends six years, one month, and government and remain true to his one day of service as Executive Secre­ Mennonite heritage. That attitude is tary of the NSBRO. almost inconceivable to many of the :|: :|: :|: :|: :|: :|: others. Paul Comly French recorded the June 27, 1946 above entry about his discussion with Had a long conversation with Harold Orie Miller on the shape of the world Bender today. . . . He said that Men- ahead as his last mention of Mennonites nonites were developing their own in his diary. school system and also were formulat­ French moved soon thereafter into ing plans for their own economic order the directorship of CARE and drew so that they would be able to withdraw many of his NSBRO staff into his from life. I have the feeling that I should leadership team at CARE: Joe Weaver, attempt to use the training and ability Gordon Alderfer, John Reimer, Richard I have in working toward a better Reuther and more. world, although I am very conscious The NSBRO-CPS experience enrolled that it all may be a futile business. . . . Mennonites in a crash course in political July 29, 1946 science. They experienced institutional­ Denison, Iowa, for a meeting of ism at its best and worst and in shades Mennonite camp directors and unit of gray in between. They were intro­ leaders. I talked this morning about the duced into the highly politicized world early history of CPS, the problems we of inter-church relations. In all of this faced and how we here tried to imple­ Paul Comly French was a mentor to the Robert S. Kreider in 1946. ment our ideals. I pointed out the dif­ Mennonites and the Brethren. ficulties in the early days of finding any As Mennonites may have lost their agency willing to have COs working for political innocence, they became a use­ them and permitting us to participate in ful political resource for those pressing the program. I said that I feel that the CO cause with government. One Quakers approached the situation from observes how French frequently cited the viewpoint that they were being help­ Orie Miller’s comments when advocat­ ful to the government and really doing ing a point with Colonel Kosch or the government a favor. . . . I am General Hershey. French used Miller’s always impressed with the sincerity of stance of innocent assurance to disarm the Mennonites and was much inter­ Selective Service’s military certitude. ested in seeing the camp again. I was One further observes how French, here when it opened in 1941. the pragmatist who had been schooled in the confrontational arts of labor August 6, 1946 negotiation, acknowledged that often Flew out to Chicago today for a meet­ politically innocent Orie Miller was his ing of the Peace Section of the MCC. mentor. He saw in Miller’s less con­ The meeting was held at the Mennonite frontational responses to Selective Serv­ Mission on South Union. It was my first ice assertiveness a way that in the long visit there since the day when the run would be more effective in achiev­ NSBRO was organized in October ing change. 1940. . . . The excerpting of one theme—the French-Mennonite connection—suggests Today Ends Six Years, that this diary of a Quaker journalist One Month, and One Day turned church administrator has much more treasure in the mine. August 28, 1946 Had breakfast with Orie Miller this ENDNOTES morning and talked about general world ‘Sec Part I, “ A Journalist’s Private Reflections problems. We discussed the possibilities on the Mennonites,” Mennonite Life 45 (June of war and he feels that people are too 1990): 18-24. war-weary to agree to an immediate war, although he thinks that eventually the moves we are making will lead to another conflict. We talked about the seeming inability of man to learn to live with man in the new atomic age and how our physical sciences were moving, forward faster than the social sciences....

DECEMBER, 1990 15 “Will a New Day Dawn from This?” Mennonite Pacifist People and the Good War by Paul Toews

A. J. Neuenschwander, long-time destructive.” He mused to Fast, “ will system was more unreserved than that Mennonite minister, conference leader a new day dawn from this?” it was a of other religious pacifists. Those and member of the General Conference question to be sure. But behind the whose theology seemed most severely Mennonite Peace Committee, articu­ question was an optimism that charac­ strained by the political necessities of lated the expectant spirit of many Men­ terized Mennonite leaders at the outset the wartime affiliation were the most nonite leaders in early 1941 when the of the war. The war could be a new day silent about the weaknesses and com­ Civilian Public Service (CPS) system for Mennonites.1 promises inherent in the collaboration. was just getting started. Writing to The Second World War was a unique The war was a novel venture into the Henry A. Fast, who became the First experience for Mennonites. Not since rights of religious dissenters. Unlike administrator of the Mennonite-run the American colonial period, if then, some previous wars, conscientious ob­ CPS camps, he expressed gratitude for had Mennonites worked so closely with jectors (COs) were given legitimacy and the generosity of a political system that the American state. War, which tradi­ a defined place in the order of a war granted alternative service for conscien­ tionally made Mennonites and the state society. Lewis B. Hershey, Director of tious objectors. The opportunity gave enemies, here strangely and, in the end, Selective Service for most of the war, the Mennonites a chance to fulfill their paradoxically drew them together. The and friendly toward the COs, labelled it civic obligations largely beyond the partnership that emerged between the “an experience in democracy . . . such purview of the military system. It was religious pacifist community and the as no nation has ever made before . . . a moment of high significance, both for political order was unique in American to find out whether our democracy is a government under military siege to of­ history. Mennonites brought to this big enough to preserve minority rights fer such a generous alternative and for partnership a theology that more clearly in a time of national emergency.” 2 Mennonites to demonstrate to them­ separated the church from the state than Hershey encouraged the churches to selves and to the nation that their pac­ the other religious pacifists. Yet the accept the Civilian Public Service ifism was “ constructive . . . instead of Mennonite embrace of the state-devised system as an instrument to achieve both public respect by engaging in service of national importance and as a program for shaping the religious and educa­ tional ideals of their people. Hershey was right on both counts. Through CPS Mennonites emerged out of the war with a new confidence about their place in the national society and with a re­ vitalized sense of their religious mis­ sion. The war nourished the ideals of service and strengthened the agencies necessary to channel the ideal. The re­ quirements of wartime benevolence matured into a theology of active recon­ ciliation that redefined the public life of the Mennonite world. But it was hardly Hershey’s urging that prompted the Mennonite govern­ ment partnership. It was the memory of World War I that largely shaped the ac­ commodation of both the pacifist con­ science and the state to each other. Cen­ Major General Lewis B. Hershey tral to virtually all Mennonite thinking,

16 MENNONITE LIFE beginning in the mid-1930s was the take in response to conscription. The necessity of preventing a repeat of the first was to accept regular military serv­ World War I conscription system. The ice. Deep convictions and a long history indignities and abuses of the first great prevented church adoption of this possi­ war were remembered in Mennonite bility. Noncombatant military service homes and churches during the inter­ was the second possibility. Some Men­ war period. Mennonite historians look­ nonite boys selected this alternative dur­ ing back on the war assumed that it had ing the First World War. The problem permanently altered the relationship was that noncombatancy was an integral between the nonresistant peoples and part of the military system. While the the militaristic state of the twentieth task of noncombatants “ was not of ac­ century. C. Henry Smith, a leading tual killing” it was “ auxiliary to this Mennonite historian, was persuaded task.” 7 Past experience showed that the that the future relationships would be incorporation of the noncombatants was more difficult than the past. Govern­ so complete that there was almost “ no ments would be less willing to make difference between this and the accept­ concessions for distinctive minorities. ance of military service.” 8 The third He understood that democratic societies position, the historic one, was refusal were frequently less able to accom­ of any kind of service. While this one modate special interests than the auto­ retained an honorific place in the Men­ cratic rulers of past segments of Men­ nonite imagination and might again be Guy F. Hershberger nonite history. Furthermore he feared required, Mennonites in the inter-war that America during the First World years were drawn to a different position. War proximated totalitarian societies in The fourth position, one that envis­ would serve directly under the super­ making the state the supreme object of aged alternative service, was the pre­ vision of governmental agencies. The loyalty and worship.3 ferred one that Hershberger and virtual­ overwhelming majority would be placed Guy Hershberger, in 1935, likened ly all Mennonite leadership would sub­ in camps under the general administra­ the situation facing American Mennon- sequently embrace. It was acceptable tion of National Service Board for ites to what European Mennonites con­ because of scriptural commands and the Religious Objectors (NSBRO) but with fronted in the nineteenth century with history of Mennonite people in reliev­ the three peace church traditions operat­ the growing militarization of their ing suffering and need. The moral ex­ ing separate camps. It was an ill-defined societies and the withdrawal of any ex­ ample of doing this amidst the destruc­ partnership from the beginning and re­ emption for reasons of conscience. The tiveness of war would be particularly mained so throughout. The imprecise United States government could easily salutary for the nation. Furthermore the nature of the understandings permitted be tempted with the same. Hershberger growing centralization and regimenta­ interminable bickering. The churches was fearful because “ the history of the tion that Hershberger and others saw in agreed, on a temporary basis, to estab­ Mennonite church seems to teach that the nation’s devotion to militarism lish, finance and operate the camps when the forces of militarism become augured for service arrangements rather under administrative guidelines estab­ too strong there is always a danger of than exemption. lished by Selective Service. As the tem­ compromise.” 4 As late as 1939 Harold The most effectual means to insure porary agreements became permanent S. Bender, the premier Mennonite his­ such a system of alternative service the questions about the appropriateness torian of the inter-war period, likened amenable to the church was to devise of the relationship only intensified. the prospects for the Mennonites in a the system and then secure its govern­ Were the church agencies autonomous coming war to the martyr tradition of mental approval.9 The domestic politi­ or were they agents of Selective Serv­ the sixteenth century.5 cal activity of Mennonites working with ice? Were the religious communities The Mennonite search for an alterna­ other peace peoples between 1935 and that historically shunned the assumption tive began already in 1919 in response the September 1940 passage of the of governmental responsibilities be­ to congressional measures proposing a Burke-Wadsworth bill was almost cause of strong theological convictions form of universal military training. In wholly focused on guaranteeing accept­ now agreeing to perform governmental what was surely a record for Mennonite ance of alternative service. The inter­ functions or not? political activism, roughly 25% of the vening time until February 6, 1941, Mennonites in early 1941 were not adult Mennonite population signed peti­ when President Roosevelt signed Exec­ troubled by these questions. They were tions requesting utive Order 8675 that established the euphoric. The relative autonomy of exemption in any future conscription administrative protocols for the alter­ CPS was the best they could have hoped system.6 The intellectual articulation of native service system, witnessed almost for. The lingering fears of a conscrip­ what would become the Mennonite feverish Mennonite political activity to tion system based on the WWI ex­ negotiating position came from Guy F. insure that it would be a system with perience now gave way to a warm em­ Hershberger in 1935. The occasion was considerable church management.10 brace of the new system. Young men the Mennonite Conference on War and Those protocols hinged together for called into national service would be Peace sponsored by one of the denomi­ six years the government and the His­ permitted to perform their obligation national peace committees. There were toric Peace Churches in a unique part­ under the guidance of the church. Se­ four positions that pacifist peoples could nership. A few conscientious objectors questered in camps under the direction

DECEMBER, 1990 17 of NSBRO, but separately operated by cial terms, would be over $3 million. the three denominational groups, their Orie Miller, the MCC Executive Secre­ service would be done within the con­ tary, did not hesitate a moment in com­ fines of their church group, or at worst mitting the church to that amount. Writ­ with fellow pacifists. ing to Clarence Pickett of the American In a January 1941 article, “ Men- Friends Service Committee he reflected nonites and the'Civilian Service Pro­ Mennonite willingness by noting they gram,” Henry Fast, the director of the “ would gladly pay their share of the camps for Mennonite Central Commit­ bill. They would do it even though tee (MCC), expressed this incongruous every Mennonite farmer had to mort­ optimism. “ If the people in our churches gage his farm.” 14 can catch a vision of the wonderful op­ The Mennonite approach to concep­ portunity God, through this arrange­ tualizing the CPS system was clearly ment of the government, has placed at different from that of other conscien­ their disposal . . . they will thank God tious objectors and from the govern­ for the opportunity and undertake it ment as well. It was an approach rooted with the determination to make the most not in the requirements of statecraft or of it. Paul believed that all things work even the furtherance of the legal rights together for good to them that love the of the citizenry in a democratic society. Lord.” 11 With the alternative system in place Henry A. Fast The lead editorial in one church Mennonites approached the political periodical—The Mennonite—was just as system more through the injunctions of effusive. “ Now our beloved United St. Paul to be subservient to the duly States has, under the guidance of the constituted authority. They accepted the heavenly Father seen the need of a law how they will answer the challenge of restraints and the compromises inherent whereby we, with others in true loyalty their present choice. Their answer will in this flawed partnership. Both the and love of country are given the priv­ not only test the reality and depth of Friends and Church of the Brethren ilege of doing service of real benefit to their loyalty to Christ and their faith in were less tolerant of various govern­ our land, entirely under civilian con­ His way of love but, in the light of Men­ ment restrictions.15 Orie Miller, while trol.” 12 nonite history, will also determine very always willing to negotiate, would not Mennonites long wanting to prove largely the whole future of Mennonit­ demand. In discussions with Paul Com- their citizenship, needing to demon­ ism in this country.” 13 ly French, Executive Secretary of strate the “ constructiveness” of their Mennonite Central Committee was NSBRO, he made it clear that asking resistance to militarism and define for confident that the churches and the in­ was a different sort of thing than themselves a different place in Ameri­ dividual young men would respond to demanding. Articulating the sentiments can society now had the chance. But this unusual opportunity “ in a sacri­ of most Mennonite leaders he wrote they would have to seize the apocalyp­ ficial spirit . . . and gladly make what­ French at one point that “ we do not feel tic moment. Fast wrote “ The question ever sacrifice is necessary.” The sac­ called to remind Government of any before American Mennonitism now is rifice to the church, calculated in finan­ moral obligation . . . or even to sug­ gest that they should feel such obli­ gation.16 The CPS experience rather was to be an act of witness. Work performed in the spirit of charity, goodwill and com­ passion would make a contribution to the nation’s well being. Mennonites would accept a system that kept their boys out of war and then expect that they go “ the second mile.” Albert Gaeddert, successor of Henry Fast as director of the Mennonite camps dur­ ing the war, defined that “ second mile philosophy.” “ It does not insist on per­ sonal rights, but rather gives thought to the obligations and duties that one has. . . . When compelled to go one mile, the nonresistant Christian does not the compulsion but rather stands prepared to volunteer the services of the second mile.” 17 The embracive position toward the CPS system was largely rooted in the Albert M. Gaeddert

18 MENNONITE LIFE memory of World War I and the chance it offered for a civic witness. But the possibilities it offered were also con­ gruent with other changes in the loca­ tion and self understanding of Mennon- ites in the middle third of the twentieth century. The Mennonite story from the sixteenth century to at least the mid- nineteenth century is best understood as an exile experience. Scattered from Western Europe both east and west, Mennonites lived on the margins of various host societies. Distanced from larger social systems by distinctive cultural and religious traditions, Men­ nonites became a people apart. The integrated nature of twentieth-century societies increasingly threatened that spatial and cultural segregation. But precisely as the isolation and cultural enclavement was passing, a new ideo­ logical system was emerging as the car­ rier of Mennonite identity. That idea­ tional system rooted in the recovery of the sixteenth century Anabaptist tradi­ tion reached its high moment when H.S. Bender delivered the Presidential address—“The Anabaptist Vision”— to the 1943 meeting of the American Society of Church History.18 The recovery of the past was clearly a means of shaping the future. Yet the bipolar quality of the historical recovery immediately posed a conundrum. It simultaneously moved Mennonites in­ ward toward the creation of a more in­ tentional “ Christian social order” and outward in missional and service ac­ tivism. It brought Mennonites face to face with what happens to many sepa­ the fellowship of the church brother­ tivities. It would be important to offer ratists and idealistic communities. It is hood.” 20 a full range of personally enriching ac­ the dichotomy between the logic of his­ The CPS experience nourished both tivities that were also expressive of the tory and theology that pointed toward sides of the ambiguity. The govern­ nonresistant idealism. In a particular separation and the logic of contempo­ ment, concerned to minimize opposition way, church leadership envisaged CPS rary experience that pointed toward from patriotic groups, established most as opportunity for re-education. Here greater social participation.19 camps in places hidden from public a generation, forcibly incarcerated by The “Anabaptist Vision” address view. Here in the less travelled roads, government requirements and seques­ amply pointed to the ambiguity. Bender Mennonites would fashion their own tered by the autonomy given the began by proclaiming that small Christian communities, prepare churches, would undertake an education was “ a programme for a new type of themselves for the future and point the in the recently refurbished idealism of Christian society which the modern nation to a better way. the Mennonite tradition. CPS could world, especially America and Eng­ The enthusiasm about war-time serv­ become the Mennonite university land, had been slowly realizing.” As ice was linked closely to the possibility experience. such the ecumenical and missionizing for Mennonite religious and character At the center of the educational pro­ imperative was clear. He concluded by development within the confined camp gram was a “ core curriculum” entitled declaring that “ the Christian may in no settings. The management partnership Mennonites and Their Heritage, a set circumstance participate in any conduct between government officials and of six booklets designed to acquaint the in the existing social order which is con­ church leaders allocated all non­ young men with their tradition and the trary to the spirit and teaching of working time to the supervision of the significance of their present service. Christ. . . . He must consequently with’ church. Beyond the 40-hour working Edward Yoder, sitting down to write his draw from the worldly system and week, the church could structure the pamphlet, noted that “ what they want create a Christian social order within educational, recreational and leisure ac­ is a kind of mutual back slapping

DECEMBER, 1990 Leadership Training School held at CPS ff!8, Denison, Iowa. Left to right, clockwise, inner row: Arthur Wiebe, Jesse Harder, Roberts. Kreider, Ralph Hernley, George H. Fadenrecht?, unidentified, Henty Guhr, unidentified, Stoltzfiis?, unidentified, Don Gundy, Ralph Beechy, Rufus? Franz, Albert Gaeddert, Erwin Goering, unidentified, Roy Umble, Hemy Renner, umden-

20 tified, Um S. Gingerich, unidentified, unidentified, Dwight Yoder, Alfred Zook, Atlee Beachy. Outer row, left side: Grant Stoltzfus, unidentified, unidentified. Outer row, right side: David H. Suderman, Jacob D. Goering, Elmer M. Ediger, unidentified.

21 effort.” 21 It was that, to be sure. But for the leaders of a post-war social social gospel and conservatism had the design was much more. They were activism.23 failed. The CPS and subsequent volun­ lessons in Mennonite ecumenicity. The The enriched service that Bender tary service programs linked orthodoxy Mennonite schismatic past was bridged hoped would arise from CPS was quick to social compassion in a fashion that by the grandeur of a shared past. They in coming. Through CPS, Mennonites permitted the church to be socially more were lessons in the history of past Men­ became aware of the potential of their activist while remaining theologically nonite benevolence with a call for re­ theology and its contribution to people conservative. This activism and the newed emphasis on active reconciling beyond themselves. Hemmed in by sec­ development of philosophy and practice work of the kind embodied in CPS. The tarian constraints, largely self-imposed, of volunteerism became the core of the forward to each volume, written by the doctrine of nonresistance had here­ ideologically revitalized tradition. general editor H. S. Bender, expressed tofore been perceived as appropriate The nation approached World War I the transforming aspiration of the book­ only for the small remnant. The tradi­ with messianic expectations. The pyr- lets and the entire educational program. tion of Mennonite theologizing into the rhic victory of 1918 sobered national He hoped they would contribute “ to a years just preceding the war over­ aspirations for a second global military greater appreciation of the church and whelmingly insisted on the distinction confrontation. Parts of the NSBRO con­ its splendid heritage of faith” but also between that might be politi­ stituency approached the beginnings of that “ from this enriched experience in cally adaptable and nonresistance that the Second World War with utopian ex­ C.P.S. may there come an enriched was politically irrelevant. But Men­ pectations. Mennonites were not alone. service, not only to the church and the nonites at least thought their war time Paul Comly French, the Friends direc­ nation, but . . . to Christ and His ever­ service was potentially significant, if tor of NSBRO throughout the war, lasting Kingdom.” 22 not always realized within the limita­ thought the CPS experience invaluable The camps, while conveying a com­ tions of the CPS system. Programs of to the nation’s democratic traditions. He mon religious education, could be a relief and voluntary service caught the thought it made two particular contribu­ laboratory for differing social strat­ imagination of the Mennonites in the tions: first it signified the preservation egies. Both the withdrawal and engage­ post-war period. The war generated a of individual rights amidst a consum­ ment positions became central to the missional and service activism that ing war; and secondly “ Civilian Public non-working program of various units. transformed Mennonite denominations. Service has to make . . . a demonstra­ Some CPS camps operated on farms The war experience helped to resolve tion of the irresistible power of con­ purchased by MCC in order to enhance the bipolar quality of the recovery.24 structive good will as against force and planning and education for subsistence The first reflective examination of the violence.” CPS would do that by forg­ farming. They were part of the larger impact of the war on Mennonites was ing model communities of peace and program of rural and community re­ Guy F. Hershberger’s 1951 study, The harmony out of the diverse peoples vitalization championed by some leaders Mennonite Church in the Second World coming to each camp. They would as an appropriate response to the loss War. Hershberger suggested the war “ create a pattern of life that will of the earlier spatial segregation. Other developed a “ social consciousness and demonstrate the way that nations can units specialized in study for post-war a new sense of social responsibility.” 25 live together in peace and harmony.” 26 relief and reconstruction programs. It did that and more. Earlier attempts The experience of religious dissenters These units became the breeding place to find a mediating place between a living together, disproportionately from peace churches with religious and cul­ tural similarities made them in actual­ ity a small slice of the larger popula­ tion. It was hardly appropriate to think that their venture in communal living would become the model for global conflict resolution. But they were not daunted by their exception. While the CPS legacy did not scale those national heights, it did prove to be a transforming experience for Men­ nonites. A new day did dawn. The church emerged out of the war a changed church. Old issues recedeckand new ones came to dominate and define its character. Studs Terkel’s best seller on World War II is called The Good War. Incongruous as the two words hinged together are, it was a “ good war” for Mennonite peace people.

ENDNOTES 'A. J. Neuenschwander to H. A. Fast. January 11, 1941, Fast Collection, box 1, folder 7, Men- Bible class at CPS #27, Mulberry, Florida.

22 MENNONITE LIFE General Conference ministers meeting at Chicago YMCA to plan CPS visitations. Seated, left to right: Amos E. Kreider, Erland Waltner, Albert Gaeddert, Andrew J. Neuenschwander, Jesse N. Smucker, John M. Franz, Freeman H. Swartz. Stand­ ing, left to right: Jacob H. Langenwalter, Walter Gering, A. W. Friesen, Olin A. Krehbiel, Walter H. Dyck, Elmer Ediger, John J. Plenen, Ed. G. Kaufinan, William Stauffer, Hcuwey E. Nunemaker.

DECEMBER, 1990 23 nonite Library and Archives, Bethel College, ,0The story of Mennonite participation in the (Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1953), pp. North Newton, Kansas. Historic Peace Churches offensive to secure the 330-331; Sibley and Jacob, Conscription o f Con­ -Quoted from Senate Committee on Military Civilian Public Service system is told in various science, pp. 311-313. Affairs, 78th Congress, 1st sesson, February 17, places. See Melvin Gingerich, Service fo r Peace: |6Orie Miller to Paul Comly French, August 25, 1941, CPS Correspondence, 1940-45, tile 4, 1943 in Mulford Q. Sibley and Philip E. Jacob, A History o f Mennonite Civilian Public Service Conscription o f Conscience: The American Suite (Akron, Pa.: Mennonite Central Committee, IX-6-3, Mennonite Central Committee Archives, arui the Conscientious Objector, 1940-47 (Ithaca, 1949), chapters IV and V; Guy F. Hershberger, Archives of the Mennonite Church, Goshen, New York: Cornell University Press, 1952), p. Hie Mennonite Church in the Second World War Indiana. “ Albert Gaeddert quoted in Gingerich, Service 123. (Scottdale, Pa.: Mennonite Publishing House, 3C. Henry Smith, Christian Peace: Four Hun­ 1961), chapter 1; Keim and Stoltzfus, The Politics for Peace, p. 404. dred Years o f Mennonite Principles and Practice o f Conscience, chapters 3 and 4. '»See Harold S. Bender, “ Anabaptist Vision,” Church History XIII (1944): 3-23. For the place (Newton, Kan.: Peace Committee of the General “ Henry Fast, “ Mennonites and the Civilian Conference of Mennonitcs, 1938), p. 27-28. Service Program,” The Mennonite LVI (January of this address in the Mennonite intellectual and 4Guy F. Hershberger, ‘‘The Christian’s Rela­ 7, 1941):3. cultural adaptation to modernity see Rodney J. tion to the State in Time of War: II. Is Alternative ,2“ God Given Opportunities,” The Mennonite Sawatsky, “ History and Ideology: American Service Desirable and Possible?” Mennonite LVI (January 21, 1941): 1. Mennonite Identity Definition Through History” Quarterly Review IX (1935): 29. “ The Mennonite need to prove their citizen­ (Ph.D. diss., Princeton University, 1977); Paul sHarold S. Bender, ‘‘Church and State in Men­ ship, since World War I, is probed in James C. Toews, “ Mennonites in American Society: nonite History,” Mennonite Quarterly Review Juhnke, “The Agony of Civic Isolation: Mennon­ Modernity and the Persistence of Religious Com­ munity,” Mennonite Quarterly Review LXIII XIII (1939): 103. ites in World War I,” Mennonite Life XXV (1989): 227-246. 6J. S. Hartzler, Mennonites in the World War (1970): 27-30 and “ Mennonite Benevolence and “ See J. Lawrence Burkholder, The Problem of or Nonresistance Under Test (Scottdale, Pa.: Civic Identity: The Post-War Compromise,” Mennonite Publishing House, 1922), p. 226-227; Mennonite Life XXV (1970): 34-37. The quote is Social Responsibility From the Perspective o f the Mennonite Church (Elkhart, Ind.: Institute of Albert N. Keim and Grant M. Stoltzfus, The from Fast, “ Mennonites and the Civilian Service Politics o f Conscience: The Historic Peace Program,” p. 2. Mennonite Studies, 1989). “ Bender, “ Anabaptist Vision,” pp. 3-4 and 23. Churches and America at War, 1917-1955 (Scott­ '■'Minutes of the Mennonite Central Peace Com­ 2'Edward Yoder, Edward: Pilgrimage o f a dale: Herald Press, 1988), p. 57. mittee, October 25, 1941; “ The Mennonite Mind; The Journal o f Edward Yoder, 1931-45. ’Hershberger, ‘‘The Christian’s Relation to the Civilian Service Program” (1941 brochure pro­ Edited by Ida Yoder. (Wadsworth, Ohio: seif State in Time of War,” p. 29. duced by MCC). Miller is quoted in Keim and published, 1985), entry for December 1, 1941, 6Ibid., p. 30. Stoltzfus, The Politics o f Conscience, p. 113. p. 446. 9Ibid., p. 33. “ See Clarence Pickett, For More Than Bread 22Sec Harold S. Bender, "Foreword” in Men­ nonite Origins in Europe. Number 1 in the series Mennonites and Their Heritage: A Series of Six Studies Designed for Use in Public Service Camps (Akron, Pa.: Mennonite Central Committee, 1942). 23See Gingerich, Service fo r Peace. Chapter XIV looks at some of the "Farm and Commun­ ity” units. Chapter XIX details the “ Foreign Relief” training schools attached to some camps. The concern for the revitalization of rural com­ munities is expressed in various places. Consult Guy F. Hershberger, "Maintaining the Mennonite Rural Community,” Mennonite Quarterly Review XIV (1940): 214-223; Melvin Gingerich, "Rural Life Problems and the Mennonites,” Mennonite Quarterly Review XVI (1942): 167-73.1 have ex­ amined this rural movement as one of the re­ sponses to modernity in “ Concern: Its Origins and Early History," (forthcoming in Review). 24See Melvin Gingerich, “ North American Mennonite Overseas Outreach in Perspective, 1890-1965,” Mennonite Quarterly Review XXXIX (1965): 262-279; John D. Unruh, In the Name oj Christ: A History o f Mennonite Central Commit­ tee and Its Service, 1920-1951 (Scottdale, Pa.: Herald Press, 1952). “ Hershberger, The Mennonite Church in the Second World War, p. 286. “ Paul Comly French, Civilian Public Service (Washington, D.C.: National Service Board for Religious Objectors, 1942), p. 11-12.

Relaxing at CPS #27, Mulberry, Florida. On top: George Maniaci and Roland Lehman.

24 MENNONITE LIFE Mennonites in World War I

by James C. Juhnke

In a recent article identifying poten­ of any German culture group in the draftees, apparently favored by the tial fields for peace researchers, Ken­ United States,” 3 nevertheless found legislation, also had to struggle for their neth Boulding called for investigation themselves accommodated in America. exemptions. The War Department regu­ of “ withdrawals from warlike activity, A separatist people made themselves at lations required that they report to the for instance, into monasticism, the home. The war and its aftermath left military camps and wait for instructions peace churches, and trade and finance.” most Mennonites with both a stronger regarding noncombatant duties to be Scholars of peace church experiences in sense of being separate and a new ap­ defined and assigned at some future wartime have often told their stories as preciation for America as a home for date.5 a kind of sectarian withdrawal or quest nonconformists. In fact Baker had set a trap. First he for toleration in the face of persecution. got the conscientious objectors into The Mennonite experience in World I. The Military Conscription Niche military camps. Then he issued secret War I, for example, filled with dramatic orders to the camp commanders to do stories of a nonresistant people suffer­ The government did not have a clear what they could to persuade these ing at the hands of a militant crusading plan for dealing with conscientious ob­ religious pacifists to take up weapons. America, has invited a focus upon the jectors to war in World War I. Secre­ The pacifists should be treated decently confrontation between a beleaguered tary Baker confused the issue by deny­ and segregated into separate detach­ nonresistant subculture and a warmak­ ing that the selective service system ments, Baker ordered. But they should ing nation.' Boulding, however, sug­ constituted military conscription. The be invited to view and participate in gested a more positive formulation: whole nation was volunteering for this camp activities that they might catch the “ How do niches open up in society to holiest and least selfish of endeavors, spirit of the war and join the crusade.6 accommodate this type of activity and Baker wrote, and selective service was The burden of holding open this organization?” 2 We might also ask, only an incidental and rational plan of precarious niche thus fell upon the how does a nonresistant subculture organizing the task. “ It is in no sense shoulders of the young conscripted men work to expand niches of withdrawal a conscription of the willing; it is rather in the camps. The churches at home and of nonviolent activity? selection from a nation which has could protest, as did, for example, the The opening of niches of withdrawal volunteered in mass.”4 True to the Mennonite Western District Conference from warmaking depends upon the creed of the Progressive era, Baker in October 24-25, 1917, when it re­ character and the commitment of both believed that all reasonable persons solved that their boys could work in the the host society and the nonresistant would support the war if they were military camps only under protest subculture. Between 1917 and 1925 given the true information about Amer­ because “ such service virtually con­ American Mennonites took advantage ica’s intentions. If Mennonite draftees stitutes military service, since the work of two niches opened, in part, by ad­ could be gotten out of their benighted is required by the military authorities ministrative policy decisions of two na­ rural environments and away from the and must be done within the military tional leaders. The first, opened reluc­ limiting influences of their narrow­ establishment.” 7 But the boys were tantly and incompletely by Newton D. minded religious leaders, Baker was under military command, and the of­ Baker, Secretary of War, provided a convinced, the uplifting influences of ficers were accustomed to military limited escape from military service the military camps would lead them to discipline rather than soft sell. Tom during the war. The second, opened in­ join the national crusade. Preheim, a Mennonite draftee at Camp tentionally by Herbert Hoover, Chair­ The Selective Service Act of May 18, Funston in Kansas, expressed his dilem­ man of the American Relief Adminis­ 1917 promised exemption from combat ma in typical Mennonite terms: “ I hope tration, allowed Mennonites to partici­ duties to members “ of some well- God will find a way for me that I can pate in the great famine relief work in recognized religious sect or organiza­ serve the Govr. and at the same time Russia after the war. The pressures of tion whose existing creed or principles not stamp my religious believe [,v/cJ.” K the first encounter helped generate forbid” participation in war “ in any Many of the peace church draftees energies to make the second a success. form.” This was a narrow niche which were subjected to humiliation, physical The result was that Mennonites, de­ excluded the non-religious and non­ beatings, courts martial and to various scribed as “ the most grievously abused sectarian pacifists. But Mennonite forms of intimidation and harassment.9

DECEMBER, 1990 25 excessive creedal passion which led local vigilantes as well as Justice Department officials to unnecessary violation of First Amendment rights. The Mennonite response to persecu­ tion was muted, as befitted a people who made a prime virtue of humility. Mennonite teaching called for obe­ dience and respect to the powers or­ dained by God. Mennonite leaders ex­ hibited respect and submission in their petitions to the government for exemp­ tion or other favors. As a people of the Bible, they generally made their case not in terms of individual rights guaran­ teed by the constitution, but rather in terms of promises which they under­ stood the United States government to World War I conscientious objectors waiting their turn for a hearing before the have made at the time of their immigra­ Board o f Inquiry. tion from Europe.17 They knew they received more humane and understand­ ing treatment from top government of­ ficials than from local and county authorities. Draftees in camp were The worst treatment often came at the 1,300 conscientious objectors were ac­ usually more safe in the hands of gen­ hands of zealous and intolerant privates cepted for noncombatant service, 1,200 erals than in the hands of common while officers turned a blind eye. Some were furloughed to service in industry soldiers. conscientious objectors were court mar- and agriculture, and 450 were court The war reminded Mennonites of tialed, contrary to Baker’s secret martialed and imprisoned.12 their Anabaptist history of martyrdom orders, and imprisoned at the Fort Government statistics after the war and their migrations for conscience Leavenworth Disciplinary Barracks. reported 3,989 drafted conscientious sake. Their wartime suffering was not Baker felt he had no option but to sup­ objectors, out of nearly three million simply an occasion for disillusionment, port the military. He eventually wrote men inducted into military service. One but an opportunity for refreshment at to Colonel Sedgwick Rice, the com­ survey of more than a thousand of con­ the spiritual springs of their people- mander at Leavenworth, “The con­ scientious objectors in army camps hood. They did experience some agony scientious objectors, like all the other revealed that about half were Mennon- of soul as some of their young people inmates of the institution, have broken ites.13 Secretary Baker did succeed in abandoned the nonresistant faith and laws and been adjudged by properly his goal of containing the problem of marched off to war, but the denomina­ constituted courts to suffer certain extensive conscientious objection inter­ tion as a whole was strengthened and penalties of imprisonment. So long as fering with the war effort, if indeed it refined in its historic identity. Survey­ they are detained in the prison they ever had been a problem.14 Neverthe­ ing both World War I and World War should live like other prisoners, be ex­ less the niche did stay open. The stead­ II, Mennonite historian Cornelius J. pected to work like others. . . .” 10 fast refusal of military service by con­ Dyck could write, “ War is good for On March 20, 1918, President Wil­ scientious objectors in military camps, Mennonites.” son issued executive order 2823, which often in the face of humiliation and The war was good for Mennonites had been drafted by Secretary Baker, persecution, provided irrefutable data because American policy opened a niche with the long-delayed definition of non- that the pacifist impulse must be accom­ for them, but also because they had to combatant service available for con­ modated, both in World War I and in pay a meaningful price to occupy that scientious objectors. Those who were future wars. During the , niche. Mennonites also were fortunate unwilling to accept military service in the niche grew into a chasm. that the United States’ involvement in the quartermaster corps, medical corps Historians have severely criticized the war was relatively brief (nineteen or engineer service, were examined for the Wilson administration for its failure months) and that the United States was their sincerity and then sent out to to protect civil liberties in wartime. on the winning side. Victors can afford agricultural assignments under the Harry N. Scheiber wrote of President to be tolerant. Postwar demobilization Farm Furlough Act. Even when fur­ Wilson’s “ abdication of personal re­ was rapid. Secretary Baker issued orders loughed the men retained military status sponsibility . . . .” 15 Daniel Beaver for release of conscientious objectors in and were under military regulations.11 judged Secretary Baker: “The war prison early in 1919. A contrast of the The furlough system was only partially finally blunted Baker’s principles.’’16 Mennonite experience in Russia is in­ successful, frustrated in some cases by Wilson and Baker believed that liberty structive. In the comparable early stages local anti-pacifist protests. The war must be temporarily limited so that it of the war, Russian authorities granted ended November 11. 1918, before the might be made ultimately secure. Their more favorable options in the Red Cross system had been regularized. About stirring moral leadership unleashed an and in Forestry Service than did the

26 MENNONITE LIFE American authorities. But the stresses They found it in the birth of a ing them how to do relief work in Rus­ of military defeat, political revolution, new “ Mennonite Central Committee” sia than had military camp com­ and economic collapse resulted in horri­ (MCC), an inter-Mennonite agency manders during the war been eager ble Mennonite suffering in the Ukraine. created specifically to respond to the to have pacifist churchmen telling them What might have happened to the Men­ crisis in Russia.21 how to treat the conscientious objectors nonite German-speaking pacifist sub­ The Mennonites would have preferred in their camps. Mennonite adminis­ culture in the United States had this to organize their relief work for Russia trator Alvin Miller later wrote about country been invaded and defeated by independently rather than in association some of the tensions: “ Col. Haskell, in Germany is, of course, a matter of with a government agency, as they had charge of the ARA in Russia, was in­ conjecture.18 It is not obvious that a in fact done in previous decades at times clined to be a BLUNT military official. crusading American democracy in de­ of special need for colonies in Russia. To have about a half dozen represent­ feat would have been more tolerant of They initially attempted, without suc­ atives of Church organizations ‘on the German-speaking pacifists than was a cess, to send aid on a southern route staff’ cluttering up his limited quarters crusading Russian empire in defeat. through Constantinople and the Black must have been rather galling to an Sea. One intrepid and persistent Men­ army officer.” 23 nonite leader, Alvin Miller, actually The opportunity to participate in II. The Benevolence Niche succeeded in getting an official agree­ relief work was more critical for the ment with the Soviet authorities and identity of Mennonites than it was for Three years after the war which had with Ukrainian officials, but civil chaos other denominations. To be sure, Lu­ painfully isolated them, American Men- and bureaucratic confusion prevented therans, Quakers, Jews and others have nonites found themselves embraced by the Mennonites from getting their own not always had a totally secure grip the American government in a common supplies into the country independently. upon social acceptability in America. endeavor for famine relief in the Soviet By force of necessity and of invitation, But the Mennonites had suffered from Union. Herbert Hoover, who had be­ MCC did its work in the Soviet Union a double liability during the war. They come famous in wartime food adminis­ under the aegis of the ARA.22 spoke German, the language of the tration, was the Secretary of Commerce While the American Mennonites had enemy; they refused military service, under the Warren G. Harding adminis­ not received all they wanted in the an action which could help the enemy. tration and the chairman of the Ameri­ famine relief effort, they had ample Recovery from their marginalization can Relief Administration (ARA). Be­ reason to be grateful for Hoover’s was especially urgent, and participation tween 1921 and 1923 the ARA carried achievement with the ARA. MCC spent in socially recognized benevolence met on a massive relief effort to relieve the $1,300,000 and fed 75,000 people in their need. suffering caused by war, civil war, and Russia in 1922-3, a small part of the In 1929 the Mennonite Central Com­ crop failures. Hoover organized the ef­ total ARA program, but an event of sur­ mittee published a 465-page documen­ fort as a combination of private church passing significance for Mennonite tation and narrative of its work, Feeding and benevolent agencies together with witness and identity. MCC eventually the Hungry, Russia Famine 1919-1925, public resources and administration to grew into the largest of all Mennonite American Mennonite Relief Operations meet pressing human need. Consistent denominational institutions. It became under the Auspices o f Mennonite Cen­ with his own philosophy of “ corporate an agency for international relief and tral Committee.24 Peter C. Hiebert, liberalism based on associational activ­ service in the name of Christ which MCC chairman and author-editor of the ity,” Hoover granted substantial auton­ fostered inter-Mennonite unity and won volume, included a photo-collage of omy to private agencies, including the respect of other denominations and voluntary relief administrators which Quakers, Lutherans, Jews, Mennonites the world at large. had been circulated by the ARA. In the and others, who wished to cooperate Hoover’s political and administrative collage was Levi Mumaw, Secretary- under ARA coordination.19 achievement in the ARA Russian fam­ Treasurer of MCC, along with repre­ American Mennonites were desper­ ine relief was remarkable. He had to sentatives of the Federal Council of ately eager to participate in Russia negotiate with a Soviet government Churches, the Catholic Welfare Coun­ famine relief, especially those who had which the United States had not form­ cil, the National Lutheran Council, the migrated from the Ukraine to the Amer­ ally recognized, and which had not yet Y.M.C.A., the American Red Cross, ican plains in the 1870s and following fully established its own civil authority. the American Jewish Joint Distribution years. In addition to the ethnic and He had to overcome American charges Committee, the Y.W.C.A., the Ameri­ family ties with cousins in the Ukraine, that the relief program would contribute can Volga Relief Society, and the the recent war experience was itself a to Communist control of Russia, charges American . In the center of this spur to Mennonite benevolent activity. which may have been at least partly pantheon was Herbert Hoover, former They had grown prosperous as the war warranted. In a situation of overwhelm­ ARA chairman who had become Presi­ stimulated the economy, and they were ing bureaucratic confusion and com­ dent of the United States. The heading stung by charges that they were con­ plexity, Hoover’s ARA administration read, “ Many Faiths United in Greatest tributing nothing—refusing military chose to make room for private agen­ of Humanitarian Accomplishments.” service and buying war bonds only cies whose directors were jealous of Here was visual evidence that Mennon­ under great pressure—while the rest of their own autonomy and had their own ites, through their benevolence, had the nation sacrificed lives and treasure ideas about how to carry on the pro­ gained a legitimate place in American in a great moral enterprise. Mennonites gram. Some ARA officials were no society. needed a moral equivalent for war.20 more eager to have church agencies tell­ How does society open up niches to

DECEMBER, 1990 27 accommodate nonviolent withdrawals Organization in America 1890-1930 (Scottdale, Mennonites, divided into many groups and not Herald Press, 1989), 338-342. bureaucratically organized, did not keep reliable from warmaking activity? In the case 3Kcnneth Boulding, "A Proposal for a Research statistics on numbers of drafted men. My own of Mennonites in American society Program in the History of Peace,” Peace and judgment is that the percentage of Mennonites from 1917 to 1922, a niche of exemp­ Change, vol. XIV, 4, Oct. 1989, 467. among World War I conscientious objectors was ’Frederick C. Luebke, Bonds o f Loyalty: Ger­ well below half. tion from military service was followed man Americans and World War I (DeKalb: North­ "Chatficld in For Peace and Justice, p. 69, by a niche of invitation to foreign relief ern Illinois University Press, 1974), xv. points out that genuine draft evaders, estimated to number 171,000, were a far more serious prob­ work. The Mennonite response to both •«From the proclamation of selective service registration, May 1, 1917, written by Bakerand lem for the government than were the “ forthright openings proved to be the turning point slightly revised by Wilson. 77te Papers of and law-abiding” conscientious objectors. for their experience and identity in the Woodrow Wilson, ed. by Arthur S. Link. ’’Harry N. Scheiber, The Wilson Administra­ twentieth century. Exemption for reli­ (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1983), tion and Civil Liberties, 1917-1921 (Cornell, vol. 42, 181. 1960), 60. gious pacifists was a precedent from ’Albert N. Keim and Grant M. Stoitzfus, The '"Daniel R. Beaver, Newton D. Baker and the previous wars, but one which had to be Politics of Conscience, The Historic Peace American War Effort 1917-1919 (Lincoln: Univer­ renewed through costly commitment in Churches and America at War, 1917-1955 (Scott­ sity of Nebraska Press, 1966), 237. dale: Herald Press, 1988), 36-40. "See Susan Schultz Huxman, “ In the World, the face of persecution. Newton D. "Order from the Adjutant General of the Army But Not of It: Mennonite Rhetoric in World War I Baker, Progressive Secretary of War, to the commanding generals of all National Army as an Enactment of Paradox,” Ph.D. dissertation, demonstrated how a liberal democratic and National Guard division camps. Printed in University of Kansas, 1987. James S. Easby-Smith, Statement Concerning the '“For a comparison and contrast of Mennonites nation could restrict the liberties of non­ Treatment o f Conscientious Objectors in the Army in the United States and Russia during World War conformists while fighting a war for (Washington: Government Printing Office, 1919), I, sec the article by James C. Juhnkc, “ World War I,” in Mennonite Encyclopedia V, a forth­ freedom. Herbert Hoover, Quaker Sec­ 37. ''Minutes o f the 26th Western District Confer­ coming publication by Herald Press. retary of Commerce, demonstrated how ence, Oct. 24-25, 1917 (Newton: Herald Press, "For an excellent discussion of Hoover's “ cor­ the principles of pluralism, voluntarism n.d.), 725. porate associational” vision sec Joan Hoff Wilson, and benevolence could unleash the ener­ “Tom Preheim to Henry Peter Krchbicl, Nov. Herbert Hoover, Forgotten Progressive (Boston: 19, 1917. H. P. Krehbiel collection, 12-29, folder Little, Brown, 1975), 43, 86, 168, 198. gies of private groups who were will­ 176. Mennonite Library and Archives. 3,'Jamcs C. Juhnke, "Mennonite Benevolence ing to cooperate with government in ’The Schowaltcr Oral History Collection at and Revitalization in the Wake of World War I," Mennonite Quarterly Review, January 1986, feeding the starving. This sequence of Bethel College has collected the stories of several hundred Mennonite draftees. Sec Voices Against 15-30. challenges contributed to Mennonite War: A Guide to the Schowalter Oral History’ Col­ 3'On the origins of MCC see P. C. Hiebcrt, revitalization both by strengthening lection on World War I Conscientious Obcjctors Feeding the Hungry, Russia Famine 1919-1925 their historic pacifist identity and by (North Newton, Kansas: Bethel College, 1981), (Scottdale: Mennonite Central Committee, 1929); and Mary S. Sprunger, ed.. Sourcebook: Oral John D. Unruh, In the Name o f Christ: A History generating for them new forms of History< lntenncws with World War One Conscien­ o f the Mennonite Central Committee and Its Seir- legitimate denominational activity in tious Objectors (Akron, Pennsylvania: Mennonite ice 1920-1950 (Scottdale: Herald Press, 1952); Guy F. Hershberger, “ Historical Background to America. Central Committee, 1986). ‘"Letter from Baker to Rice, May 21, 1919, Na­ the Formation of the Mennonite Central Commit­ tional archives RG 98, USDB Fort Leavenworth, tee,” Mennonite Quarterly Review (July 1970), ENDNOTES 383.2, Box 24. 213-44; and Robert S. Kreidcr and Rachel Waltner Goossen, Hungry, Thirsty, a Stranger, •The Mennonite experience in World War I has "Keim, The Politics, 52-53. 13Statement Concerning the Treatment o f Con­ the MCC Experience (Scottdale: Herald Press, not been covered in a single volume. Gcrlor scientious Objectors in the Army (Washington, 1988). Homann of Illinois State University is completing D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1919), 25. 33 Alvin J. Miller, “The Beginning of American a manuscript on the topic. The most recent guide 1’Charles Chatficld, For Peace and Justice: Mennonite Relief Work,” Mennonite Life (April to printed and archival sources may be found in Pacifism in America 1914-1941 (Knoxville: 1962), 1971; Krcider, Hungry, 34-39. the notes to chapter eight of James C. Juhnkc, University of Tennessee Press, 1971), 75. The 33Alvin J. Miller letter to Guy F. Hershberger, Vision, Doctrine, War: Mennonite Identity and Dec. 10, 1966. Archives of the Mennonite Church, J. C. Meyer Collection, 1-44, 1962-67. "Hieben, Feeding the Hungry (Scottdale; Men- nonitc Central Committee, 1929), following p. 434.

Quartet, CPS #18, Denison, Iowa. Left to Right: Henry F. Schultz, Mt. Lake, Min­ nesota; Clarence E. Friesen, Henderson, Nebraska; Russell H. Massanari, Fisher, Illinois; John F. Schultz, Mt. Lake, Minnesota.

MENNONITE LIFE 28 The Church of the Brethren and World War I: The Goshen Statement

by Robert G. Clouse

Roland Bainton described the Men- church that led them to form a com­ They would be governed, too, by their nonites, the Quakers and the Brethren munity of believers adhering to a strict English neighbors, some of whom were as “ remarkable because they have church discipline, a nonresistant rela­ critical of them. The effect of this whole largely preserved their testimony tionship to the state, and the teaching situation was to cause great numbers of against war” from their founding until that believers should follow the exam­ the Brethren to move into states to the the present day. He called these reli­ ple of Christ no matter what the cost in north and west. In emigration the gious bodies the historic peace churches suffering or social ostracism. In time, Brethren became a frontier people “ not because other churches are not the Brethren left Europe for the New without educational advantages.”3 concerned for peace but because these World because of persecution and a lack Many writers have labeled the early groups have refused to take part in of economic opportunity. By 1740, most nineteenth century Brethren experience war.” 1 While this has been true as a of them had settled in Pennsylvania. as the “ Dark Ages” or the “ Wilderness general statement, there have been The Brethren flourished in colonial Period.” times when the Brethren have been con­ times because they were one of the Ger­ However, as the century progressed, fused as to how to express their non- man sectarian groups encouraged by the the Brethren began to merge into the resistance. This has been especially true proprietors of Pennsylvania. Indeed, the society around them by securing an with the acculturation of the church and Quakers had considerable influence on education and following other than the increasing power of nation states in them as evidenced by their manner of agricultural pursuits. These new trends the twentieth century. It is with a failure dress, their church buildings, and their in the church led to ever more intense to adequately support a peace witness ecclesiastical policy. Church govern­ controversies among the members. The that the following article will deal. ment proved to be difficult for the Brethren would try to settle their dif­ The Church of the Brethren traces its Brethren, however, as they attempted ferences at Annual Meetings which origin to a group of individuals who to balance the control of an annual combined the characteristics of a fam­ were baptized by trine immersion in the meeting of all the members with a con­ ily reunion, a camp meeting, and a busi­ Eder River near Schwarzenau, Ger­ gregational form of church polity. This ness session. All those who attended many, in 1708. At times referred to as rather anomalous situation gave rise to were given hospitality by the host con­ Brethren, new Baptists, Dunkers, Ger­ many divisions within the group. gregation, and a tent or a large hall was man Baptist Brethren, or Church of the Another problem confronted the erected to accommodate them. By the Brethren, these believers felt that they Brethren when they refused to support mid-nineteenth century, a group of were restoring the New Testament prac­ the American Revolution because of elders, called the Standing Committee, tices by observing trine immersion, a their nonresistant attitude and their con­ prepared the business items to be pre­ three-fold communion service, anoint­ servative view of government. Conse­ sented to the conference by combining ing of the sick with oil, and other quently they were persecuted by the questions, or queries as they called “ apostolic” practices and attitudes. revolutionaries and were forced to adapt them, put forward by the congrega­ However, it would be more accurate to to the new situation by forming a unique tions. These sessions would reach say that, “ Brethren find their begin­ subculture. One scholar observes: “The agreement by unanimous consent. Great nings at the confluence of three reli­ hostility under which these people have weight was given to the pronounce­ gious streams—Reformed Protestant, lived caused them to develop a greater ments of previous meetings, and thus Radical , and Evangelical Ana­ exclusiveness. The doctrine of noncon­ the Brethren did their best to try to work baptist.” 2 From the Reformed tradition formity to the world gripped the church. with the forces of change. The extent they acquired basic Protestant doc­ A special type of dress as a mark of of their involvement in American life trines. From Pietism, they emphasized separateness from the world was estab­ can be seen by the long list of goods and an ethical and emotional commitment lished. The Revolutionary War settled practices that were condemned by the to that recovered the the matter that this was going to be an Annual Meetings as they tried to slow essence of the faith from a hardened and English-speaking country. The Brethren the pace of change. These included such disputatious orthodoxy. From the Ana- saw that an adjustment in language items as “ . . . bells, carpets, life in­ baptists, they adopted a view of the would be necessary through the years. surance, lightning rods, likenesses, li-

DECEMBER, 1990 29 quor, musical instruments, ordained from combatant service but left a host ly stated that “ there is no absolutely ministers, secret societies, shows and of questions unanswered. Among these noncombatant service under military fairs, tobacoo, and wallpaper.”4 By were whether conscientious objectors control. Further, that if men are cooks, 1883 these tensions caused a division in should wear uniforms, engage in mili­ or in ambulance service, or in the medi­ the church resulting in a main body, tary drill, or accept noncombatant cal corps, they are supposed to be called Conservatives; an old order assignments that would help the war ef­ armed, and if they or the work in their party, referred to as the Old German fort. Church leaders received numerous hands is attacked, they must use their Baptist Brethren; and a progressive appeals from individuals in army camps arms in defense, and at any time, when group, known as the Brethren Church. as to a Christian response to these prob­ ordered to do so. Many of these men It is with the Conservatives (later called lems. The answers the men received would enter into monetary bonds to re­ the Church of the Brethren) and their usually represented two contradictory main faithful to the Government, if per­ reaction to World War I that this paper views. One group of ministers “ advised mitted to enter constructive occupations will deal.5 the drafted young men to have absolute­ and assist in the planting and gathering By the later nineteenth century, the old ly nothing to do with the military of crops, in harmony with their reli­ exclusiveness which had characterized machine, and refuse to do any kind of gious convictions.” 8 The second division of the Goshen the Brethren during the period between service. They argued—with some de­ Declaration was intended for distribu­ the American Revolution and the Civil gree of consistent validity—that there tion by the churches to their members War was changing. Although peace could be no such thing as non-military who had been drafted. This section ex­ resolutions were passed by the Annual service as long as the government, plained in careful detail the biblical and Meetings and pacifist articles appeared through its military arm, the War De­ historical position of the Brethren. It in denominational publications, the partment, regimented life and directed cited numerous scripture passages in­ church was more interested in its mis­ all physical force, including the lives of cluding: Mt. 5:21-30; 26:52; Jn. 18:36; sion program and the development of the people, to prosecute war to the end and II Cor. 10:3-4, as well as the ex­ Sunday schools and colleges. The peace of killing and defeating the enemy. The amples of Christ, the attitude of the witness of the church was taken for other group advised the young men to apostolic church, and the historic granted. Although a peace committee be loyal citizens of the government and Brethren policy towards civil govern­ was established in 1911 it was not given accept noncombatant service, as long as ment to support . The con­ a prominent place in church affairs and it did not violate the individual ference also urged members to labor no funds were provided for its support. conscience.” 7 Because of the confusion more zealously in Christian mission and At the same time the church was be­ in the brotherhood, the district meeting humanitarian efforts to alleviate the suf­ coming more tolerant of the views of of Northwestern Kansas petitioned H. fering and burdens brought upon human­ individual members whose ideas dif­ C. Early and other officers of the An­ kind by the war. fered from denominational teachings. nual Meeting, asking that a special con­ However, the document states very Brethren were attending public schools ference be convened to consider the clearly that Brethren were “ not to enlist problems of those who were conscripted and colleges and were taking their place in any service which would, in any in the life of the community. It was and to clarify how they should respond way, compromise our time-honored becoming much more difficult for them to the demands placed upon them by the position in relation to war; also that they to dissent from the nationalistic spirit state. refrain from wearing the military uni­ of society on the peace question than it Early polled the standing committee form. The tenets of the church forbid had been when the church was more and a majority of them supported the military drilling, or learning the art or special meeting which was held at isolated and existed as a counter­ arts of war, or doing anything which Goshen, Indiana, January 9, 1918. At culture. Most members of the church contributes to the destruction of human voted in elections and many were even this conference the delegates drafted a life or property. We commend the holding public offices at the time of the declaration which clearly outlined the loyalty of the brethren in the Camps for outbreak of World War I. As one Breth­ nonresistant position of the church and their firm stand in not participating in ren historian explained, “ it was the advised Brethren to have nothing to do the arts of war. We do not wish to op­ temperance movement in its develop­ with the coercive activities of the state. pose the of those brethren ment during the years prior to the war The statement, divided into three major who, in some Camps, found work (that) was a great influence in starting sections, began with a memorial declara­ which they felt they could conscien­ the Brethren to vote.” 6 Because of the tion to President Wilson which strongly tiously do, but we urge them to do only loss of their distinctive subcultural supported the government of the United such work as will not involve them in ideology and the increasing homogeneity States. In addition to pledging the co- the arts of destruction.” 9 The third part of American life, Brethren young peo­ operation of the church with the state, of the statement provided for the estab­ ple of draft age were not taught to relate it requested that Brethren be allowed to lishment of a Central Service Commit­ their pacifist heritage to the complex­ serve in a noncombatant role in agricul­ tee which would replace the peace com­ ities of twentieth century militarism. ture and peaceful industries. This would mittee in representing the Brethren to Consequently, despite the appeals of enable church members to serve their the government, in supervising camp church leaders for peace, the advent of country without doing violence to their visitors, and in making common cause the Great War caught the church and consciences. Calling attention to the with the other peace churches. her members unprepared. confusion that was taking place in army The Goshen meeting also made ar­ The draft law of May 18, 1917, ex­ camps with regard to conscientious ob­ rangements for the denominational press empted members of peace churches jectors the statement firmly and polite­ to print copies of the second section of

30 MENNONITE LIFE the declaration so that it could be ment, the government agreed to drop led to persecution by the government distributed to church members who had legal proceedings against the Brethren. but also further division in the church. been drafted. Henry felt that the three representatives A Firm pacifist stand might also have Brethren who were confronted with had made a genuine contribution to the set back the pace of liberalization which challenges to their faith by the army welfare of the church. As he reflected many felt was necessary for the con­ used copies of the statement to defend on the matter several years later, tinued existence of the church in a their noncooperation in the camps and “ . . . the Church of the Brethren was rapidly changing society. by April 1918, the document had come saved from the impending tragedy. The Another difficulty facing the Church to the attention of the Department of Central Service Peace Committee- of the Brethren during the war years Justice. On July 8, according to J. guided by wisdom from a gracious was the crusade mentality that swept the Maurice Henry, a member of the peace heavenly Father—had saved the church country and the resulting intolerance committee who served the Church of from a tragic situation: the church and hysteria directed at those of Ger­ the Brethren congregation in Washing­ which the peaceful saint, Alexander man heritage. For example, an Iowa ton, Frederick P. Keppel summoned Mack, had founded, for which Chris­ politician claimed that 90 percent of all him to his office. Keppel was third topher Sower had been persecuted, and the men and women who taught the assistant Secretary of War who was for which John A. Bowman and John German language were traitors. German responsible for dealing with questions Kline had suffered martyrdom in times library books were destroyed, German involving conscientious objectors. of war.” 12 place names were anglicized, and ham­ Many years later Henry recalled the in­ Later Brethren writers dissented from burgers and sauerkraut became “ liberty cident with a mixture of horror and this view. The judgment of Roger Sap- sandwiches” and “ liberty cabbage.” fear: “ He received me very courteous­ pington sums up the matter from the Leopold Stokowsky, conductor of the ly, took me to his private desk and perspective of historians committed to Philadelphia Symphony, refused to per­ picked up a document bearing the seal a peace witness, as he points out that form German songs, operas and con­ of the War Department from the office there “ seems to be room for honest temporary orchestral music. However, of the Advocate Generals. I listened to doubt as to whether the greater tragedy he did ask for special permission from the reading of the document with its may not have been the unconditional President Wilson to continue conduct­ charges which still ring sometimes like surrender of the Brethren leaders re­ ing Brahms, Beethoven, Bach and a nightmare in my ears. After reciting sponsible for this decision to the coer­ Mozart. Many churchmen contributed the law, the document charged the of­ cive power of the Federal govern­ to this collective paranoia by approv­ ficers of the Goshen Conference, and ment.” 13 ing of statements similar to the one at­ the authors of the Goshen Statement as For the remainder of the war the ma­ tributed to Billy Sunday, “ If you turn guilty of treasonable intent of obstruct­ jority of Brethren young men who were hell upside down you will find ‘made ing the operation of the Select Draft drafted went into the armed forces and in Germany’ stamped on the bottom.” 15 Law. Dr. Keppel turned to me and said, made up their own minds as to the type Those who were accused of pro- ‘What have you to say about this mat­ of service they would perform. Although German sentiments were often exposed ter?’ I studied a moment and quietly ex­ there were always a few who would not to mob violence. Several individuals plained the facts about the Goshen Con­ wear a uniform or cooperate in any way were forced to kiss the flag and publicly ference, and then asked, ‘Will you have with their commanders, most of them recite the Pledge of Allegiance and at the case stayed forty-eight hours and ignored the historic position of the least one young man of German parent­ give us time to prepare an answer?’ church. age was lynched. Many individuals who The request was granted and the two It is easy to condemn the actions of advocated pacifism, such as Eugene V. other members of the Central Service Christians who lived in fear of persecu­ Debs, were imprisoned.16 By the time Committee were called to Washington tion and who did not take a firm stand, the conflict had run its course, hundreds by telegram.” 10 but as Dale Brown reminds us, the com­ had been arrested under the espionage When the other members of the com­ mittee that advised the Brethren to and sedition laws enacted in 1917. In mittee, W. J. Swigart and I. W. Taylor, withdraw the Goshen statement repre­ such a xenophobic, conformist atmos­ arrived they discussed the situation and sented a people who were trying to phere, very few refused to support the agreed to encourage the brotherhood to change their identity from members of war. While one may not agree with withdraw the Goshen statement. As a German subculture to that of main­ those who withdrew the Goshen state­ Ronald Cassidente points out in a stream America. He cites Floyd Mal- ment, the reasons for their action can thoughtful unpublished analysis of this lott, a former Professor of church be understood. incident, if the government had carried history at Bethany Seminary, who sug­ If the story ended here it would seem out its threats, the members of the gested that when Brethren began to that the coercive power of the nation­ standing committee could have been drive automobiles and accept modern state had won an almost total victory sentenced to two years in prison and/or technology more than their religious at­ over the Brethren peace witness. How­ fined $10,000.00 because they would tire changed. “ Their peace beliefs went ever, this was not the case. As a have been charged with “ attempting to out as well. Many Brethren purchased phoenix rising from the ashes of a incite inaction, disloyalty, mutiny, and Liberty Bonds and were caught up in destroyed cause, a group of young men, refusal to do duty in the military forces the high fervor of patriotism.” 14 The most notably Rufus Bowman, Dan West of the United States.” 11 peace witness of historic Brethrenism and M. R. Zigler, were motivated by Once the committee had promised to became a problem to these individuals their wartime experience to devote discontinue the circulation of the state­ and maintaining it would not only have themselves to the cause of international

DECEMBER, 1990 31 understanding and to encourage a re­ nonites and the Quakers in peace ac­ recognition outside the brotherhood newed peace witness on the part of the tivities. Bowman represented the Breth­ than did Bowman.20 Educated at several entire denomination. They did this in ren in joint meetings with individuals institutions of higher learning including positive ways by advocating alternative from the other peace churches and Bethany, Manchester College, and Cor­ service for conscientious objectors and President Franklin D. Roosevelt where nell University, West chose to serve the by providing for extensive relief proj­ a form of alternative service was agreed church as a lay leader rather than as a ects which became models for later upon for members of their constituen­ minister. Following his discharge from ecumenical efforts. The first of this cies. The President was pleased with the the army in 1918, he became a public great triumvirate of peace leaders, result and complimented the group by school teacher and administrator in Rufus D. Bowman (1899-1952), “ was stating: “ I am glad you have done it. Ohio. By 1930 he was appointed direc­ probably the most trusted, best re­ That’s getting down to a practical basis. tor of youth work for the Brethren. He spected, and best beloved of all Breth­ It shows us what work the conscientious used his position to encourage a variety ren church men during the period 1930- objectors can do without fighting. Ex­ of projects including 1950 and, next to Zigler, the most in­ cellent! Excellent!” 18 The result of this “ 20,000 Dunkers For Peace.” West fluential in forming the policies of the agreement was the establishment of the also recruited young people to serve in denomination. His activities spanned Civilian Public Service Camps. Con­ work camps and participate in peace the careers of pastor, church executive, scientious objectors during World War caravans. In 1936 he was relieved of his and educator.” 17 II were allowed to go to abandoned other duties to visit college campuses Bowman became president of Beth­ Civilian Conservation Camps and work where he spoke on behalf of various any Seminary and completed his Ph.D. at socially worthwhile projects such as pacifist issues. at Northwestern University in 1944. His forest management and soil conserva­ During the Spanish Civil War he dissertation, part of which was pub­ tion. Later, a number of detached proj­ went to Spain to organize relief efforts. lished as The Church o f the Brethren ects were opened to these individuals so Faced with the problem of doling out and War, 1708-1941, became the that they could serve in hospitals and scarce supplies to the starving, he con­ classic study of the Brethren and war. on other charity projects. The Church ceived the idea of sending livestock to He devoted much of his energy as a of the Brethren spent considerable sums those in need as a way of providing a leader in the church to the peace move­ of money to support these men, espe­ continuing source of food. “ The initial ment by attending international peace cially in the work camps, because the recipient of a cow or goat would pledge conferences, serving on the national government refused to finance them.19 to pass on the first female offspring, so council for the Fellowship of Recon­ The second of these peace activists, that a chain of aid would grow in ciliation, and cooperating with the Men- Daniel West (1893-1971), won greater geometric progression. The idea was

Alternative service delegation to President Roosevelt, January 10, 1940. Left to right: Clarence Pickett, Walter Woodward, Rufus Jones, (Quakers); Peter C. Hiebert, Harold S. Bender, (Mennonites); Rufus Bowman, Paul Bowman, (Brethren).

32 MENNONITE LIFE realized during World War II as the peace.” 23 effort was the establishment of the Heifer Project, Incorporated and began When the hostilities ended, Zigler peace studies program at Manchester sending livestock to the needy around returned to the work for his beloved College. the world. American farmers, church church. Appointed to the position of While working among the Brethren, groups, and service clubs were attracted Director of Home Missions at Elgin, Il­ Zigler also became involved in ecumen­ by the earthy practicality of the scheme linois, he was rather hastily ordained to ical activities. He cooperated with the and it found broad support.” 21 Later, the the Christian ministry. Never one to local Ministerium, the Illinois Council project expanded until it became inter­ worry about theological subtleties, he of Churches, and the National (Federal) denominational and ecumenical in scope. remained a lifelong liberal in theology. Council of Churches. From 1941 to Despite his heavy commitment to hu­ His major reason for accepting the posi­ 1947 he represented the Brethren on the manitarian missions Dan West continued tion at the emerging headquarters of the executive council of the Federal Coun­ to be active in peace education by direct­ denomination was to encourage Breth­ cil of Churches. As in the case of his ing human relation seminars, initiating ren peace activities. In his view, that own denominational services, it was his group dynamics programs and sponsor­ was the major contribution that the desire to spread the Gospel of peace that ing retreats designed to foster Christian Church would make to Christ’s King­ motivated his ecumenical commitment. community. dom. Because the ecclesiastical struc­ In the years following World War II, The third Brethren peace hero, ture was in the early stages of develop­ he became the Brethren representative Michael Robert Zigler (1891-1985), ment and finances were limited, Zigler to the World Council of Churches and was perhaps the most influential of all. soon found himself not only serving the in 1945 he was chosen to be a member He combined the extensive influence of Home Missions but also the General of the council’s prestigious central com­ Bowman among the members of his Ministerial Board and the Board of mittee. At meetings of this body, he denomination with the ecumenical vi­ Christian Education. In addition, he constantly reiterated his simple dramatic sion of West.22 “ acted as chairman of the staff under plea for peace. “ When will Christians Educated at Bridgewater College, the Council of Boards, the coordinating stop killing each other?” he would ask. Vanderbilt University, Bethany Semi­ body that brought together representa­ “ Other participants might personally be nary, and the University of Chicago, tives of the several church boards and pacifists but as representatives of non­ Zigler was one of those who took non- the seminary. As such he acted virtually pacifist churches they could not com­ combatant service in World War I. He as a general secretary. He was clearly mit their denominations officially to a volunteered to work with the YMCA the major figure on the denominational peace position. Privately, they encour­ and was assigned to Parris Island, South staff level. His appearances at the An­ aged Zigler to keep up the pressure.” 25 Carolina, where he organized programs nual Conferences reflected this role. During World War II he left his other that gave spiritual comfort to the men Articles summarizing the events of the church duties to become Executive Sec­ and provided them with wholesome conferences during the 1930s and 1940s retary of the Brethren Service Commit­ recreational activities. Later in life he featured his activities on every page.” 24 tee which sought to provide for alter­ recalled the traumatic experience of see­ From 1919 to 1939 he visited almost native service opportunities and to re­ ing recruits subjected to intensive drills, all the Church of the Brethren congre­ lieve the suffering of those individuals bayonet practice, and unrelenting in­ gations across the country. That was in war zones. Zigler and Bowman were doctrination. They were driven almost quite a feat when one considers that in instrumental in bringing the Mennonites beyond endurance in exhuasting, stress­ 1931 there were over 1,027 congrega­ and Quakers together with the Brethren ful ways to break their wills and remold tions meeting in 1,464 places. Of these, to develop a program for conscientious them in the Marine Corps pattern. 1,137 were in rural areas and small objectors. Although not entirely satis­ Zigler was impressed by the way the towns which were difficult to reach. factory, this system was a vast improve­ recruits were prepared to die for their Almost half of these congregations had ment over what had prevailed during country. He began to dream of a time less than 100 members and they were World War I. Zigler also served as when young people could be prepared served by part time or unpaid ministers. Chairman of the National Service Board with the same determination to give However, in such a situation, a man of for Religious Objectors which acted as their lives for peace. His “ experience Zigler’s warm, down-to-earth, personal a liaison between those young men who there loomed large in his self-under­ style could win many friends and enlist wished to maintain a peace witness and standing and future direction for the rest widespread support. This would stand the government. of his life. He often spoke of the time him in good stead in later years when After 1945 his attention turned to there as the catalyst for his dedication he needed support for his peace activi­ another way of expressing his Christian to peace; he was conscious of the para­ ties on an international scale. Of all his concerns. For Zigler, pacifism was not dox that an assignment oriented toward duties, the one that interested him most a quietist faith but an active commit­ maintaining the morale of thousands of was that of Secretary of Christian Edu­ ment to alleviate all forms of human young men being trained to kill should cation because this board was respon­ suffering. The devastation in Europe be the motivation for his giving his life sible for championing the peace con­ gave ample opportunity to feed the to the cause of restraining the impulse cerns of the church. One of the novel hungry and clothe the naked. The agen­ toward war. Again and again, as he methods he introduced while serving in cy through which he worked had as one spoke to large and small audiences this post was to enlist Brethren higher of its goals rendering service to the about peace, he would state that it was educational institutions in a unified at­ needy regardless of nationality, race or his YMCA job on Parris Island that was tempt to build a strong church and a just creed. During the war this activity was formative in his career as a crusader for society. A lasting contribution of this somewhat limited, but with the advent

DECEMBER, 1990 33 tive way during World War II. The Statement Compromise,” (1971), p. 10. of peace the Brethren began to supply •’Henry, p. 532. food, materials and assistance to the peace witness of the church with its •’Roger E. Sappington, Brethren Social Policy, victims of the conflict. By 1948, the roots in the lives of individuals such as 1908-1958 (Elgin, 1L: Brethren Press, 1961), p. John Kline lives on. Today many Breth­ 44. Sappington's assessment of the situation con­ Brethren Volunteer Service was organ­ tinues, "In its hysterical desire to wipe out Ger­ ized to allow young people to offer ren echo the outlook of that great Civil man sympathizers in the United States, the their time and talents to various projects War martyr who explained: “ I have a government had also found cause to prosecute an somewhat higher conception of true innocent religious minority with long-standing both at home and abroad. In the same views regarding their participation in military year, Zigler moved to Europe where he patriotism than can be represented by service,” p. 45. settled in Geneva. From this base of the firing of guns. . . . My highest con­ •4Dalc W. Brown, Brethren and Pacifism ception of patriotism is found in the man (Elgin, IL: Brethren Press, 1970), p. 41. For some operation, he directed the humanitarian thoughtful applications of the lessons learned from efforts of the church and represented the who loves the Lord his God with all his the Goshen Statement sec Dale W. Brown, Brethren in the World Council of heart and his neighbor as himself. Out Simulations on Brethren History (Elgin, IL: of these affections spring the subordi­ Brethren Press, 1976), pp. 77-105. Churches. Under his leadership, tons of •’Quoted in Ray H. Abrams, Preachers Present food and supplies as well as thousands nate love for one’s country; love truly Anns: The Role of the American Churches and of animals were distributed to people virtuous for one’s companion and chil­ Clergy in World IT«r.v / and II, with Some Obser­ dren, relatives and friends; and in its vations on the War in Vietnam (Scottdale, PA; who had lost almost everything they Herald Press, 1969), p. 79. possessed in the war. Many young peo­ most comprehensive sense takes in the •6An excellent vignette of Debs as a war critic ple came to serve as short term workers whole human family. Were this love is Lawrence Winner, “ Eugene V. Debs: Socialist universal, the word patriotism, and its and War Resistcr,” in Peace Heroes in Twentieth- under his administration in refugee Century America, cd. C. Dcbcnedctti (Bloom­ camps, hospitals, nursing homes, and specific sense, meaning such a love for ington,IN: Indiana University Press, 1986), pp. as youth leaders. It was difficult, even one’s country as makes its possessors 56-84. The most readable biography of Debs is ready and willing to take up arms in its Ray Ginger, Eugene V. Debs: A Biography (New for those who did not support a peace York: Macmillan, 1962). witness, not to admire these forms of defense, might be appropriately ex­ •’Donald Durnbaugh, "Introduction” to the alternative service. punged from every national vocabu­ Garland reprint edition of Bowman's The Church lary.” 26 o f the Brethren and War, 1708-1941 (New York: After his retirement Zigler never Garland Publishing Co., 1971), p. 10. ceased working for a better world. In ‘"Bowman, p. 279. 1944 he had encouraged the Brethren ENDNOTES •’For more details about the situation of the church in World War 11 see David B. Eller, •Roland H. Bainlon, Christian Attitudes Toward Service Commission to purchase the “ Social Outreach" in Church o f the Brethren: former campus of Blue Ridge College War and Peace. A Historical Survey and Critical Yesterday and Today, ed. D. Durnbaugh (Elgin, Re-evaluation (New York: Abingdon Press. in New Windsor, Maryland as a head­ IL: Brethren Press, 1986), pp. 119-134. 1960). p. 152. 20For more about the admirable career of Dan ’Donald Durnbaugh, "Early History” in quarters for the church’s relief ac­ West see Glee Yoder, Passing on the Gift: The tivities. Not only were goods shipped Church o f the Brethren, Yesterday and Today Story o f Dan West (Elgin, IL: Brethren Press, (Elgin, 1L: Brethren Press, 1986), p. 3. there for distribution to the needy in 1978). -’Rufus D. Bowman, 77w Church o f the Brethren 11 Durnbaugh, "Introduction,” p. 9. other lands, but refugees were tempo­ and War, 1708-1941 (Brethren Publishing House, "The dean of Brethren church historians, rarily given housing at the center and 1944). p. 98f. Donald F. Durnbaugh. has written a fine biog­ 4Durnbaugh. p. 13. raphy of Zigler, Pragmatic Prophet, The Life o f young people were trained for Brethren •'For a brief introduction to the major Brethren Michael Roben Zigler (Elgin, IL: Brethren Press, Volunteer Service. The facility was also groups sec Meet the Brethren, ed. Donald Durnbaugh (Elgin. 1L: Brethren Press. 1984). 1989). made available to other agencies and 2iIbid., pp. 40f. These are a series of articles reprinted from The 2AIbid., p. 81. denominations and it became a center Brethren Encyclopedia (Philadelphia: The Brethren Encyclopedia Inc., 1983-1984), three 2>Ibid., pp. 191. for ecumenical relief efforts. In 1980 ’"Benjamin Funk, Life and Labours of Elder volumes, which is a veritable gold mine of infor­ Zigler began to sponsor a series of pro­ John Kline (Elgin, IL: Brethren Publishing House, mation about Brethren beliefs, history and grams at New Windsor aimed at specific 1900), p. 246. For evidence of a continued peace practices. interest among the Brethren see Dale Aukcrman, For information about the Progressive Brethren vocational groups that would revitalize Darkening Valley, A Biblical Perspective on attitude toward the war sec Herman A. Hoyt, Nuclear War (New York: The Seabury Press, the peace emphasis of the church. "Nonresistance" in War: Four Christian Views, Called “ On Earth Peace.” the organi­ 1981); Dale W. Brown, Biblical Pacifism, A cd. R. G. Clouse (Winona Lake. IN: BMH Peace Church Perspective (Elgin, IL: Brethren zation continues to operate seminars, a Books. 1986). pp. 27-57; also D. C. Moomaw's Press, 1986) and D. F. Durnbaugh, ed. On Earth two books Christianity versus War (Ashland, OH: Peace: Discussions on War/Peace Issues Between bookstore and other programs designed Brethren Publishing Co.. 1924) and A Cloud o f Friends, Mennonites, Brethren and European to foster international understanding. In Witnesses, An Expression o f the Deep Convictions Churches 1935-1975 (Elgin, IL: Brethren Press, this way “ he being dead yet speaks” o f Faithful Men Who Are Opposed to War (Ashland. OH: Brethren Publishing Co.. 1925). 1978). to younger generations of Brethren as Bowman. The Church o f the Brethren and Nor­ well as those of other denominations man Thomas, Is Conscience a Crime? (New who would follow the Prince of Peace. York: Vanguard Press. 1927) refer to the coura­ geous stand of many of the Old Order Brethren Consequently, from the perspective as they refused to serve in the armed forces. of over six decades one can take con­ 6Bowman, p. 164. solation from the fact that the nation 7J. Maurice Henry’, History o f the Church o f the Brethren in Maryland (Elgin, 1L: Brethren state did not win a total victory over the Publishing House. 1936), p. 526. Brethren in World War I. Individuals 8Minutes o f the Special General Conference of such as Bowman, West and Zigler prof­ the Church o f the Brethren, Held at Goshen, In­ ited from the mistakes of an earlier era diana, January 9, 1918, p. 13. 9Ibid., p. 6. and provided the leadership that encour­ '"Henry p. 530. aged the church to support conscien­ "The Gospel Messenger, v. 67 (July 27, 1918), tious objectors in a much more effec­ p. 2. Quoted from Cassidente, "The Goshen

34 MENNONITE LIFE Comparisons and Contrasts Among Historic Peace Churches by Hugh S. Barbour

The leaders of the three “ Historic dream of a “ rule of the Saints,” as were elements of mutual aid in the food Peace Churches” cooperated closely in the Mennonites had after the Münster Friends tried to send through George defining, setting up, and running the tragedy. In Pennsylvania, indeed, Washington’s siege lines to British-held Civlian Public Service Camp system. Friends practiced theocracy. They ex­ Boston, or to Ireland in its civil war of The Friends’ camps were a little less pected that Quaker stands like the re­ 1798, and even in Quaker aid to the concerned for their Church’s influence jection of oaths and armaments, would South in our own Civil War. By that with the camp life, but this was partly be accepted without coercion by all time, however, Quaker aid to slaves and because the twenty Friends camps (out citizens once their consciences were freedmen and to the Irish during their of the 67 total) had only 950 Quaker enlightened. This came true so far as potato famine had moved beyond conscientious objectors within them, as the Mennonite and Brethren settlers in mutual aid into wider philanthropy. against 4665 Mennonite and 1510 Pennsylvania were concerned. Further Quaker schools and Sunday schools for Brethren conscientious objectors. By research may reveal how those sectar­ the poor of London and Philadelphia necessity as well as temperament, ians viewed the Pennsylvania govern­ had the same effect. In 1864 after the Friends were more open to campers ment. Crimean War the Quakers sent food to from other churches.1 In the non-Quaker colonies, such as Finland. In 1864 and 1870 they sent aid All the camps’ costs were entirely Rhode Island and early Carolina, to the Danes and to the city of Nancy borne by the churches, except for the Quaker citizens married, dressed and when they were invaded by the actual buildings. Thus the Quakers’ two worshipped only among Friends. They Prussians. and a third million dollars felt more like expected fines and imprisonments for The temptation of Quaker benevo­ philanthropy than did the Mennonites’ refusing war taxes and militia duty; but lence has not been to limit the efforts to three million or the Brethren’s one and they were also willing to be elected as mutual aid, but to become paternalistic two-thirds.2 But all three churches faced governors or legislators. In recent in helping unfortunate strangers. In the same problems of maintaining times, a Quaker like Senator Douglas World War II Roger Wilson, the head morale and discipline for men coerced saw himself as a social reformer, not of British service work, warned Ameri­ into dull and government-assigned dig­ as a representative of his church’s moral can Friends, ging chores isolated from society, when order, nor as a renegade from his The best Quaker relief work has, I think, they had been promised “ work of na­ church. Some of this difference has in­ sprung from a sense of common sin lead­ tional importance under civilian direc­ deed been cultural. Quakers in CPS ing to a sense of common suffering and tion.” Here the Mennonites’ centuries the subsequent need for . . . a common camps were 43% urban professionals repentance, . . . a real intention to break of patience under “ powers that be,” and only 11 % farmers. Meanwhile the the circle of sin and suffering by living who were supposedly, but not visibly, Mennonites were 12% professionals in the grace of God, whose will for us ordained of God, paid off better than and 59% farmers. in any particular situation is a real ob­ Quaker individualism. The contrast has long been true for jective fact... known through prayer__ The Quakers were less tame under relief programs as well. The Men­ Inspired Quaker relief workers cease to government than were Mennonites and nonites sent some relief to strangers in be external agents; they become a real part of the chaos, the misery and the Brethren, which points to a deeper the Spanish Civil War. But their feeding perplexity in which they move. . . . We historical contrast. This difference program in Russia in the 1920s had need the experience [of] John Woolman made Quaker World War experiences been mainly a mutual aid project for when he saw himself as no longer a lead them in almost the opposite direc­ fellow Mennonites. The Quakers who distinct and separate being, but part of tion from those of the Mennonites and provided $20,000,000 of relief in suffering mankind.4 Brethren. The Mennonites’ version of Samara during the same Russian In relation to their governments, a “ two-kingdom ethic” is as close to famine3 were continuing the pattern Quakers at their best also feel the com­ Luther’s as to the Quaker theocratic they had begun when they fed a million mon bonds and responsibilities of ideal o f4 ‘speaking truth to power. ’ ’ The children a day in blockaded post-war humanity and nationality. Thus the early Quakers, as their enemies re­ Germany. Early Quaker philanthropy Mennonite and Brethren leaders went minded them, had not renounced their had also been mostly mutual aid. There to ask the government Selective Service

DECEMBER, 1990 35 leaders Clarence Dykstra and Lewis B. German and Austrian citizens stranded with its life and its leaders. Here Hershey about alternative service for and imprisoned in England when the Quakers met the Mennonites and Breth­ COs on December 10, 1940, after the war broke out. Then came a longer- ren coming the other way, out of their draft law passed in September, a year term War Victims relief program that separatist isolation, while they still kept' before we were at war; but the Quaker was the ancestor of both the British their radical critique of the faith and leaders had met with Roosevelt about Friends Service Council and the Ameri­ ethics of most so-called Christians. the draft the previous January, and had can Friends Service Committee. Finally, Thus all the “ Peace Churches” found gathered representatives from 22 Year­ there was a Friends Ambulance Unit themselves national leaders of the pro­ ly Meetings in July 1940, to organize which served at and behind the battle testing young people in the Viet Nam lobbying against the draft itself in Con­ line in Flanders and later also in Italy, War era. During that war the New Call gress. Three years later they turned the where the parallel Red Cross ambulance to Peacemaking and the vision of the resulting War Problems Committee into work inspired Hemingway’s Farewell nonviolent “ Lamb’s War” united peace the Friends Committee on National to Arms. My father served in both people in practical action against social Legislation, the first permanent church Quaker units. He was at Ypres in time evil. lobby.5 to identify chlorine as the gas used on Mennonites and Brethren service It also came more easily for Quakers the victims he brought in during the first committees may have kept better con­ than for the other “ Peace Churches” German gas attack. sensus with their communities of faith, to propose positive alternative actions In the second War, the Friends ambu­ and better roots in the Bible as over for COs in wartime. Friends had been lances were on constant duty during the against secular radicalism, than have the as hated in England in the Crimean and blitz bombings of the British cities. Friends Service Committees. Quakers the Boer wars as the German churches Quakers thus felt very much part of the have been quicker to accept the chal­ had been in World War I, but this was wider wartime society. American lenges to find and overcome the causes partly because urbanized British Quakers Friends naturally tried to prepare for a of domestic, sexual, racial and eco­ were raising their voices within the na­ similar duty, but their Haverford train­ nomic violence and oppression. tional arena. John Bright had been in ing unit, and a team already on ship­ Parliament until his stand against the board off the Cape of Good Hope, were Crimean War, when he said “ the angel cut off by the Starnes Amendment that ENDNOTES of death [was] abroad throughout the limited COs to conventional work 'Data from Mulford Sibley and Philip Jacob, land” and it lost him his seat. In the within this country. Conscription o f Conscience . . . 1940-47 (Ithaca, Boer War, British Friends had been The Civilian Public Service expe­ NY: Cornell University Press, 1952) and Clarence spurred on by Emily Hobhouse’s visits rience, however, and the growing aware­ Pickett, For More Than Bread (Boston: Little, ness that needs for which the American Brown, 1953). to British concentration camps for 2ldem. Boers in South Africa and had sent Friends Service Committee was sending 3Homer and Edna Morris papers, Earlham Col­ relief to those enemies. relief were due to basic social injustices, lege Archives; Frank Surface and Raymond turned that committee and Friends gen­ Bland, American Food in the World War and The British Quakers’ response to the Reconstruction Period (Stanford, CA: Stanford first World War included intense lobby­ erally in the direction of social protest University Press, 1931). ing for peace and against the draft. and of work of social change. Except 4Rogcr Wilson, Relief and Reconstruction, Pen­ for a few communes, this did not drive dle Hill pamphlet no. 22 (Wallingford, PA: Pen­ Many were jailed for refusing it. But dle Hill, 1943), 11, 15. three service programs were also set up. Quakers into a separation from wider 3E. Raymond Wilson, Uphill for Peace (Rich­ First, there was immediate relief for society, but it meant a confrontation mond, IN: Friends United Press, 1975), ch. 2.

In the barracks at CPS #24, Hagerstown, Maryland.

36 MENNONITE LIFE Book Reviews

Merrill Mow. Torches Rekindled: The light. The most important Bruderhof This seems to constitute a double stan­ Bruderhofs Struggle fo r Renewal, “ error” related by Mow was how it dard in terms of when “ attention to de­ Foreword by Tom Sine and John came to exercise a dominating influence tail” is of interest, and when it is not. Perkins. Rifton, NY: Plough Publish­ over the Forest River colony, one of the These “ confessions” surface from a ing House, 1989. “ ethnic” Hutterite communities; Forest narrative framework of loosely linked River then transferred its affiliation to anecdotes, which doubtless held the at­ In 1964, the Society of B rothers- the Bruderhof in 1955. As a result, the tention of Mow’s dinner table compan­ more often referred to as “ the Bruder­ Hutterian Brethren severed their affilia­ ions, but are often less compelling to hof” —published Torches Together, tion with the Bruderhof, which was only an outsider. Perhaps the book’s greatest Emmy Arnold’s memoirs of the Bruder- restored in 1974 after Heini Arnold, son strength is in Mow’s own incidental hof’s first decades. In Torches Rekin­ of Emmy and Eberhard, had repeatedly reflections on Christian community, dled, Merrill Mow presents the “ next humbled himself before Hutterian lead­ which are often moving, insightful, and installment” of that community’s his­ ership. wonderfully straightforward. These un­ tory. A former member of the Church This bears recounting, but few details doubtedly reflect the broader Bruderhof of the Brethren, Mow joined the Brud- are revealing: Heini is cast as the perspective, as well as the virtues of erhof in 1955; he died before publica­ paragon of Bruderhof virtue, while Eberhard Arnold’s vision. But Mow tion, and the book is a transcription of precise description gives way to an all- fails to relieve the discomfort of ex- dinner table reminiscences. Emmy Ar­ too-familiar vagueness. Other disturb­ Bruderhofers and some observers at the nold had written in a similarly “ folksy” ing incidents are alluded to, but only in continued dominance of the Arnold clan style, and focused on the Bruderhof’s passing—such as the apparent “ purge” and the ongoing pattern of “ dynastic “German period.” She described its that took place around 1959-1961, succession” in community leadership. founding in 1920 by herself and her which other sources claim effected the His obliviousness to such issues seems husband Eberhard; their ensuing pur­ departure or “ expulsion” of over 600 to be guarded by a kind of “ innocence.” suit of Christian community, influenced members. Mow voices regret, but Emmy Arnold’s memoirs were also first by the ideals of religious avoids citing individual responsibility characterized by an innocence: hers and the German Youth Movement, then because it was the “ atmosphere” that would unsettle the modern mindset, turning toward Anabaptist models. This was to blame—which, as a diagnosis, because it surfaces as an expression of led to affiliation with the North Ameri­ sidesteps accountability with disturbing wonder at incidents that make sense can Hutterian Brethren in 1930. Her convenience. (For a significantly dif­ only through a faith commitment; narrative climaxed with the disbanding ferent assessment of the problems lead­ Mow’s innocence, on the other hand, of the community by the Third Reich ing to the severing their af­ comes into view not as a glimmer to in 1937, after which the Bruderhof filiation with the Bruderhof, see John unanswerable questions, but as a gloss resettled first in England, and then in A. Hostetler and Gertrude Enders to questions which the Bruderhof has Paraguay. Mow then covers the Bruder­ Huntington, The Hutterites in North failed to address. hofs “ North American period,” begin­ America (New York: Holt, Rinehart and But Mow confronts even the most ning with the gradual transfer of popu­ Winston, 1967), pp. 107-108. The best- critical reader with the fruits of Bruder­ lation and leadership from Paraguay to known reference on the “ purge” is hof commitment. These come to the the eastern United States. His intent is Benjamin David Zablocki’s The Joy fid fore, for example, in his references to to offer a religious understanding of the Community (Baltimore: Penguin, 1971), Bennie Bargen. Bargen left Bethel Col­ Bruderhof’s schism, and later reuinifi- pp. 98-110.) lege for the Bruderhof in the mid-1950s, cation with the Hutterian Brethren. The Mow specified individual account­ but was then among the many to leave “narrative structure” of these two ability very infrequently, but one excep­ at the end of that decade. A little more books is then quite different: Emmy tion to this is curiously harsh: the sin­ than ten years later, Heini Arnold Arnold’s story builds steadily, present­ ful “ambition” of Hans Zumpe as learned that Bargen was terminally ill, ing a community struggling “ against leader was finally paired with the reve­ and came to North Newton, Kansas, to the grain” of dominant societal trends, lation of his adultery. Specification of plead with Bargen to return. Mow does and maintaining a clarity of vision even sinfulness was then made in the case of not specify whether this was a gesture in the face of Nazism; Mow blazes a a member who was cast out and did not of “ repentance,” or the drawing in of more challenging narrative path, relat­ repent, but no accusation approaching a “ lost sheep.” Mow’s account of Bar- ing not the clarity, but the “ blindness” this one in potency was directed toward gen’s return is preceded by reference of his community, and the fruits of an any member who remained or returned to the Bruderhof’s concern for “ lost aggressively pursued repentance. to the community; in their case, allu­ sheep.” However, he also seems to im­ The book’s title, Torches Rekindled; sion to “ bad atmosphere” misguiding ply that Heini’s motives were in part implies the extinguishing of a guiding the collective community was sufficient. those of regret. Mow thus leaves the

DECEMBER, 1990 37 impression that Bargen may have been proaches to create and sustain right rela­ “salt of the earth” in these matters. wronged, but he was also a “ lost tionships in our communities. With its ideas and group study questions sheep.” Bargen’s son Eldon told me In Changing Lenses Zehr is arguing for each chapter, this book encourages that members of the Bethel College for the criminal justice system to change discussing what that role should be. community attempted to persuade Bar­ its paradigm. The system, he believes, The causes and remedies to crime are gen to stay; however, he chose to return needs to move from what he calls a complex, and our natural avoidance of to the Bruderhof, and as a result spent “ retributive” model of justice to a these issues is understandable. Yet many of his final days outdoors sur­ “ restorative” mode of justice. Retrib­ crime will pull us into the problem one rounded by children, dying “ with a tan utive justice, he says, sees crime as “ a way or another, either as a victim, of­ on his face.” Eldon Bargen himself has violation of the state, defined by law­ fender, or as a community member some ambivalence about his father’s breaking and guilt. Justice determines voicing opinions on public policy. What decision—but could we have offered blame and administers pain in a contest policies do we advocate and on what Bennie Bargen that much? Can we offer between the offender and the state basis? that much today? directed by systematic rules.” On the After having read the book, one of other hand, restorative justice views our agency’s volunteers commented James I. Lichti crime “ as a violation of people and that he would like to have a copy sent Los Angeles, California relationships. It creates obligations to to each of our state legislators. Whether make things right. Justice involves the it gets that kind of distribution. Chang­ Howard Zehr, Changing Lenses: A New victim, the offender, and the commun­ ing Lenses certainly is an excellent Focus for Crime and Justice. Scott- ity in a search for solutions which pro­ source to promote and cite in our dis­ dale* PA: Herald Press, 1990. Pp. mote repair, reconciliation, and reassur­ cussions in working toward improve­ 271. ($14.95 paperback) ance.” ments that can have profound impact on The key to change, as Zehr promotes people’s lives. There is hardly a community today through the book’s title, is to alter the Fred Loganbill that doesn’t feel overwhelmed by the way we look at and describe the prob­ Director of VORP for Offender/Victim problems of crime. Assaults, thefts, and lem. For example, if justice is primarily Ministries illegal drug activity dominate the daily defined as punishing the wrongdoer, Newton, Kansas news. How should society respond to then we can expect a continual need to these problems? Even if such measures expand our prisons, have more frus­ were curbing the rising crime rate, are trated and angry victims and plan for John B. Toews, Perilous Journey: The harsher sentences for offenders, build­ crime’s increasing burden to take even Mennonite Brethren in Russia 1860- ing more prisons, and the use of the a greater toll on all of society. To 1910. Winnipeg and Hillsboro: Kin­ death penalty really the answer? change the outcome we need to change dred Press, 1988. Pp. 94 ($9.95- For over a decade, Howard Zehr,* our basic assumptions and goals. paperback). particularly as a churchman and as a The author clearly states this is a book Mennonite, has been providing insight­ of ideas of where our criminal justice Perilous Journey is a small book (94 ful and guiding leadership in matters of system can and needs to go. In arguing pages) briefly surveying the Mennonite criminal justice. That leadership con­ for a move to a more restorative model Brethren Church in Russia from its in­ tinues in a strong way with his new of justice, Zehr acknowledges that ception in 1860 to the eve of World War book, Changing Lenses: A New Focus many questions remain on the practical I. The author, John B. Toews, teaches for Crime and Justice. implementation of this approach. How­ history at the University of Calgary. He Zehr’s book is an examination of our ever, there are examples. One is the is a well known authority on the Men­ current criminal justice system: its relatively few victim-offender recon­ nonite experience in Russia, having assumptions, priorities, and goals. His ciliation programs (VORP) operating in written a number of articles and books assessment finds the system seriously or along side of the judicial system on this subject, including Lost Father- failing everyone involved—the victim throughout Canada, the U.S., and land and Czars, Soviets and Mennonites. and the offender and the communities Europe. VORP is the process of bring­ This book is not detailed or compre­ that they and we are a part of. ing victims voluntarily to meet face-to- hensive. Such a slender volume cannot In a readable style, Zehr draws from face with their offenders to discuss expect to cover what P. M. Friesen’s many years of involvement, including facts, feelings, and plans for resolution larger work (900 pages) does. Instead over 10 years as the Director of Men­ to right the wrongs as much as possible. it is more like a snapshot, capturing the nonite Central Committee’s Office on Zehr calls for more programs to be major themes of the first fifty years of Criminal Justice, to describe the com­ developed and tries to move the system Mennonite Brethren history in Russia mon experiences and feelings of victims and our communities towards a more and offering some new insights to this and offenders. He shows how and why restorative model of justice. And this movement. we need to be doing a better job of ad­ is Zehr’s hope—that if no other institu­ Toews begins his story by describing dressing the needs of victims and of­ tion in society is exploring new perspec­ the Mennonite Church in Russia during fenders to help them experience-justice. tives, the church certainly needs to be. the mid nineteenth century. Here the With a biblical and historical over­ For even though extreme moral, ethi­ author offers some new perspectives by view, Zehr explains how the present cal, and theological differences can be using sources not available to earlier system inadequately deals with issues found in the church concerning issues writers. In particular, he utilizes the such as power, repentance, and forgive­ of crime and justice, Zehr does take diary entries of David Epp who records ness. We need, Zehr says, new ap­ seriously the church’s role to be the aspects of Mennonite life, twenty to

38 MENNONITE LIFE thirty years prior to the 1860 schism. and the Mennonite Brethren -closer ulation growth and decline, membership In Epp’s reflections, drunkenness and together. While many differences still turnover especially among young peo­ deviant sexual behavior are prevalent in existed, the Brethren and the Mennonite ple, involvement in town business, eco­ the communities. Church found it to their advantage to nomic development. Familiar themes of Lifestyle and confession did not match cooperate in many institutional ventures. MC history surface: the building of and the spirituality of the community Toews’ short volume is helpful to institutions such as Hesston College and was not what it should be. Moreover, historians, sociologists, church leaders South Central Conference, slowly grow­ the close-knit Mennonite colonies had and to Mennonite Brethren who want ing acculturation, the rise and decline become something of an authoritarian a short but insightful glimpse of their of the “ doctrinal era” and outward Mennonite state, a kind of theocracy past. Early Mennonite Brethren history signs of nonconformity such as head that failed to distinguish between the is a mixture of both positive and nega­ coverings. Even here there are a few City of God and the earthly city. tive elements. The author has tried to inter-Mennonite signs: a scattering of Toews goes on to describe the begin­ tell both sides of this story. He de­ GC, Low German family names and a nings of the Mennonite Brethren scribes the early Mennonite Brethren founding bishop with the marvelously Church. Renewal came largely from Church in the context of the political, unlikely name of Benjamin Franklin preachers outside the Mennonite estab­ social, and religious world in which Hamilton. lishment. When revival preachers came they lived and the circumstances asso­ to the villages and preached repentance, ciated with its ongoing transformation. Esther Jost, ed. 75 Years of Fellowship: some accepted the invitation and broke Perilous Journey is a well written nar­ Pacific Conference of the Mennonite away from the established Mennonite rative history describing the dynamics Brethren Churches. Fresno, CA: Church. This lead to the formation of which shaped the early Mennonite Pacific District Conference of the the Mennonite Brethren Church. Brethren experience in Russia. Mennonite Brethren Churches, 1987. But in chapter four, “ Dangerous Richard Kyle Pp. 122. Journey,” Toews demonstrates that the Professor of History and Religion path to renewal was a perilous trek. Tabor College The history of one of the most impor­ This radical religion could not be con­ tant and influential regional Mennonite tained in the traditional Mennonite Rachel Waltner Goossen, Meetingplace: groupings is described in this brief framework. It broke out, sometimes in book. The approach is topical, rather a way that shocked the traditionalists. A History of the Mennonite Church of Normal, 1912-1987. Normal, IL: than chronological, with chapters by ten In particular, the "froehliche Richtung” different authors. Expected themes are (joyous enthusiasts) movement ex­ Mennonite Church of Normal, 1987. Pp. 179. covered: origins, schools, home mis­ ploded, emphasizing feelings and emo­ sions. Other, less routine subjects tions so foreign to the joyless Men­ Rachel Waltner Goossen, Prairie Vision: receive a chapter: theological changes, nonite religion. The new movement was A History of the Pleasant Valley Hispanic outreach, women, music. This faced with a balancing act between two Mennonite Church 1888-1988. Har­ is a glimpse of a Mennonite group extremes: the lifeless, creed-propound­ per, KS: Pleasant Valley Mennonite learning to deal with ethnic diversity ing traditionalism or the zealous, more Church, 1988. Pp. 146. and urban America. erratic enthusiastic Christian experience. Toews goes on to focus on other These two recent congregational issues that grew out of the Mennonite histories join a slowly growing shelf of revival. Were members of the new high quality works on Mennonite con­ church to be satisfied with personal gregations. The two congregations are salvation or would discipleship be to be commended for selecting a highly emphasized? Given the individualism qualified author and doing the behind- found in the new church, how was it to the-scenes work necessary to produce be unified and organized? Toews indi­ a good congregational history. cates that the Mennonite Brethren were Meetingplace should be required quite successful in transforming this reading for every Mennonite who is reckless individualism into an organized conscious of the current evolution of religious body with a strong institutional Mennonite unity. The Normal church basis. is a 1970s merger of an old Central In several of the later chapters, Conference, background, GC Toews looks at Mennonite Brethren church with a younger, fairly tradi­ relationships with the outside world. He tional, MC church. This is also a examines the changing world of the late fascinating story of how an urban, nineteenth century as it relates to the strongly evangelistic, and very Amer­ religious values of the Mennonite Breth­ icanized group gradually recovered its ren Church. In particular, Toews notes Anabaptist heritage and identity. The the new church’s interaction with the author’s father was pastor of this church Baptists and the impact of the Blanken­ from 1972 to 1986. burg Conference on the Brethren. By Prairie Vision is the story of a rather the early twentieth century, outside more conventional, rural MC congrega­ pressures had pushed the Old Church tion. Familiar rural issues appear: pop­

DECEMBER, 1990 39