Mennonites and Slavery

[QuietObserver]

I'd like to discuss Mennonites and slavery. My understanding is that Mennonites didn't help slaves escape like the Quakers did. Can we discuss this? My understanding is that Mennonites were opposed to slavery, but weren't particular sympathetic to the black slaves and considered them inferior. My assumption may be wrong. Was this the right response?

I remember one of my schoolteachers explaining that Mennonites didn't help slaves escape because of Scriptures like Ephesians 6:5-8. Recently, the thought came to me - how is escaping from prison is any different from escaping from slavery. The early Anabaptists escaped from prison. Dirk Willems, who escaped from prison, is an Anabaptist hero for saving his pursuer.

[Josh]

A helpful book on the topic is Philemon, although this changes the topic to "The Apostles and slavery". It would appear that Paul persuaded a runaway slave to return to his master, yet he did so in a restorative, gospel-focused way that brought repentance and reconciliation to all.

[QuietObserver]

A helpful book on the topic is Philemon, although this changes the topic to "The Apostles and slavery". It would appear that Paul persuaded a runaway slave to return to his master, yet he did so in a restorative, gospel-focused way that brought repentance and reconciliation to all.

I think Philemon needs to be understood in its context. Slavery in the Bible and US slavery in the 1800s are two very different animals. I do wonder what lessons from Philemon apply in our Western individualistic culture. If a slave is bound to his master, I wonder what Paul would say about changing jobs for better pay or better work environment.

[Hats Off]

I would like to think that Mennonites did help with the underground railway but Sam Steiner has this to say in "In Search of Promised Lands."

The reticence to own slaves does not mean that Mennonites were active abolitionists. Unlike the Quakers, who originally owned quite a few slaves, Mennonites were never significant slave owners. But also unlike the Quakers, Mennonites took no leadership in rejecting slavery as the century progressed. There was no Mennonite equivalent to Quaker John Woolman. Later Mennonites in Canada were not active in the Underground Railroad,

[francis]

I would like to think that Mennonites did help with the underground railway but Sam Steiner has this to say in "In Search of Promised Lands."

The reticence to own slaves does not mean that Mennonites were active abolitionists. Unlike the Quakers, who originally owned quite a few slaves, Mennonites were never significant slave owners. But also unlike the Quakers, Mennonites took no leadership in rejecting slavery as the century progressed. There was no Mennonite equivalent to Quaker John Woolman. Later Mennonites in Canada were not active in the Underground Railroad,

It's shameful that they did not help. Too often rejecting "the world" would have simply meant not getting one's hands dirty by helping those the world mistreated.

[Judas Maccabeus]

I would like to think that Mennonites did help with the underground railway but Sam Steiner has this to say in "In Search of Promised Lands."

The reticence to own slaves does not mean that Mennonites were active abolitionists. Unlike the Quakers, who originally owned quite a few slaves, Mennonites were never significant slave owners. But also unlike the Quakers, Mennonites took no leadership in rejecting slavery as the century progressed. There was no Mennonite equivalent to Quaker John Woolman. Later Mennonites in Canada were not active in the Underground Railroad,

It's shameful that they did not help. Too often rejecting "the world" would have simply meant not getting one's hands dirty by helping those the world mistreated.

Maybe to be less hard on them, helping runaway slaves was actually against the law. I would expect that they were doing a balancing act between their disgust at slavery and Romans 13. Remember, slavery was legal, and helping runaways was against the law, even in "free" states. We know the outcome of this so we tend to project back our knowledge onto them.

Canadians, however, would not likely have had the Romans 13 considerations.

J.M.

[appleman2006]

It is easy to say that the Mennonites did not get it quite right 175 years ago.
How do you think our great great grandchildren will judge us on the abortion issue? Just something to think about.

[Robert]

It is easy to say that the Mennonites did not get it quite right 175 years ago.
How do you think our great great grandchildren will judge us on the abortion issue? Just something to think about.

Or illegal immigration.

Not quite the same thing, but if you think about it, it is bypassing the law to help those in very poor situations.

While we are called to help the wayfarer, we are also called to respect Caesar. So how much do you help to obey God's law before you start to break man's law?

To be fair, it was 4 Mennonites who wrote the first letter to some Quakers about the wrongness of slavery. They sat on it for 50 years, then finally presented it to their national council. That is where they ratified their Quaker stance against slavery.

The challenge is with questions like this, Mennonitism in the US is not a unified group with a pope type dictating. Each congregation has a lot of autonomy. Abortion is one example of this. Mennonite USA has a strong statement and stance against Abortion, but there are many progressive congregations who kind of ignore it and make pretend it doesn't exist.

[Dan Z]

It's shameful that they did not help. Too often rejecting "the world" would have simply meant not getting one's hands dirty by helping those the world mistreated.

I think this is right Francis. Anabaptist two kingdom theology and focus on civic obedience has sometimes acted to stifle or slow down Anabaptist responses to the apparent wrongs and injustices occurring in society around them. I think this was primarily because of their understanding of the two kingdoms.

Historically, most Mennonites have not tried to reform or correct the world around them (which they saw as irreparably lost, corrupt and full of injustices). This perspective has led them to appear aloof at times to societal conflict and struggle, including not choosing sides in wars and moral causes. In obedience to Christ, they would willingly respond to needs that came to them - feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, biding up wounds, etc. - but they were not out to fix a depraved society or be involved in civil disobedience to improve it. Secondarily, they were driven by a strong sense of civil obedience, when that obedience did not violate their faith, choosing peaceful existence over law breaking and agitation...fear God, honor the king.

It's not that they took the Calvinist view of things - holding to total depravity and a fatalistic view of the damnation of the world and lost. No, they believed that Christ would usher in his Kingdom and redeem all that is broken, both people and society. It's just that they believed that the Kingdom of God (Christ's pure Kingdom of love, justice and peace) would be ushered in through the Church - as followers of Christ live according to his teachings and example - modeling for the world the way of Jesus, a society of Light lived in contrast to the darkness of the world.

This perspective has historically kept Anabaptists like Mennonites back from the front lines of societal struggle - slavery, civil war, prohibition, etc. This means that Mennonites have not lead the way in some of the great moral struggles of society - and they sometimes have been accused of being indifferent to the worlds injustice. In contrast however, these same Anabaptists, because of their Kingdom theology, have often been found at the front lines of religious struggle - living a more radical (albeit non-combative) faith expression than many of the more culturally and religiously assimilated groups around them - even facing persecution and derision for it.

[appleman2006]

It's shameful that they did not help. Too often rejecting "the world" would have simply meant not getting one's hands dirty by helping those the world mistreated.

I think this is right Francis. Anabaptist two kingdom theology and focus on obedience has sometimes acted to stifle or slow down Anabaptist responses to the apparent wrongs and injustices occurring in society around them. I think this was primarily because of their understanding of the two kingdoms.

Historically, most Mennonites have not tried to reform or correct the world around them (which they saw as irreparably lost, corrupt and full of injustices). This perspective has led them to appear aloof at times to societal conflict and struggle, including not choosing sides in wars and moral causes. In obedience to Christ, they would willingly respond to needs that came to them - feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, biding up wounds, etc. - but they were not out to fix a depraved society or be involved in civil disobedience to improve it. Secondarily, they were driven by a strong sense of civil obedience, when that obedience did not violate their faith, choosing peaceful existence over law breaking and agitation...fear God, honor the king.

It's not that they took the Calvinist view of things - holding to total depravity and a fatalistic view of the damnation of the world and lost. No, they believed that Christ would, usher in his Kingdom and redeem all that is broken, both people and society. It's just that they believed that the Kingdom of God (Christ's pure Kingdom of love, justice and peace) would be ushered in through the Church - as followers of Christ live according to his teachings and example - modeling for the world the way of Jesus, a society of Light lived in contrast to the darkness of the world.

This perspective has historically kept Anabaptists like Mennonites back from the front lines of societal struggle - slavery, civil war, prohibition, etc. At times it has meant that Mennonites have not lead the way in some of the great moral struggles of society - and they sometimes have been accused of being indifferent to the worlds injustice. In contrast however, these same Anabaptists, because of their Kingdom theology, have often been found at the front lines of religious struggle - living a more radical (albeit non-combative) faith expression than many of the more culturally and religiously assimilated groups around them - even facing persecution and derision for it.

Dan this is an excellent summary of the conflict that many Anabaptists faced and do face today.

In fact it describes my own conflicting emotions as to how I best deal with situations at times. When do I speak out? When is staying quiet simply a sign of cowardice? Or when can I actually show the better way more significantly by simply living the quiet and peaceable life and trying to entice others to do the same?

I have not got that all figured out in my first 55 years here on earth. Maybe after another 55 I will have the answers.