Last month we stepped back and took a wide look at the
nature and shape of the Anabaptist world of 1800. We learned that about 500 Amish had moved
from their European homes to Pennsylvania. In the New World, they settled in Lancaster and Berks Counties, where
they were free to own their lands and worship in peace. While a few faced persecution from their
interactions with the Native Americans, most lived in peace and were able to
develop their farms from the wilderness. But in a manner not much different
from their distant Anabaptist brothers and sisters in Russia, they soon faced
tests about how to practice their faith in practical ways. And much like the events in their history,
these tests were often focused on their nonresistant stance.
The first such test happened in 1774-78 when the young
upstart American Colonies rebelled against their British king. In the Colonies,
this was a widely popular war among the people. The citizens were encouraged, and expected, to participate either by
direct enlistment or by assisting in the war efforts. Food and ammunition,
along with the other necessary goods, were moved by wagons, and sometimes
farmers were forced to give up their crops and wagons in the war effort. The
British also would conscript local crops, animals, and manpower as they moved
into an area.
Contrary to how history has been taught about this time
period, not nearly everyone in the Colonies supported the efforts of the
Colonists. Those who did not do so were
called Loyalists or Tories. In order to root out those not favorable to the
rebellion, the Continental Congress called for oaths of allegiance to their
cause. Most of the colonies passed laws
that allowed them to seize the property of anyone who refused to swear oaths of
allegiance to the new government. By
1777 most of the 13 colonies, who were in open and active armed rebellion
against the British, passed Test Acts which required all citizens to swear
oaths of allegiance and commit to assist in defending their states from the
British through the use of arms. Those
unwilling to do so were at risk of banishment, the forcible seizure of their
properties, and/or imprisonment and other punishment.
In 1775, Mennonite and German Baptist leaders appealed to
the Pennsylvania legislature for relief from military duty and assisting the
war efforts. They suggested alternative
duty in providing for the poor and destitute in the colony. Instead, the legislature passed a war tax
that directly taxed those unwilling to fight and provided a means where one
could buy a substitution for military duty. This substitution fee would directly pay another man to fight in their
place.
The Amish and Mennonites who lived in Lancaster and Berks
Counties were very near the center of the conflict. As the pressures between the opposing armies
increased, these peace-loving Anabaptists who had been harried and harassed in
Europe began to feel some of the same pressures. In addition to their nonresistance, they felt
strongly that to swear oaths was wrong. Many of them had affirmed their obedience and loyalty to the British
crown when they became citizens in the colonies. To break their word was a serious
matter. They had also had much freedom
under the British, and now the Patriots were taking these freedoms away.
What should the Millers, Yoders, Oberholzers, and Landis’ do
as they faced these tests. For many of
them, this sounded very similar to what they had heard that their forefathers
had experienced in Europe. As they read
one of the few books that any of them owned, The Martyrs Mirror, or sang the hymns from their Ausbunds, surely they wondered if they
were about to face the same fate as so many of their ancestors had.
As with the early Anabaptists and the tests that
these Amish and Mennonites faced, we often face choices whether to engage in
the political systems around us.While
not as overt as the Revolutionary War, we are often asked which “side” we
support.Tests of engagement are as
difficult to answer today as they were then. As we, like they, face those choices, it is never as simple as one side
or the other.Perhaps in those moments
we should ask whether there is another way, a third way.