|
Mysteries of the Kingdom of God Newsletters Sermons by Eli Hofer The Writings of Ulrich Stadler |
The Christian Communalism of the Hutterian Brethren By Robert Friedmann American Society for Reformation Research December 29, 1954 The epistles and confessions of faith and the tracts [of the 16th century] by Jacob Huter, Peter Riedeman, Ulrich Stadler, Peter Walpot, and all the lesser known brethren, the numberless martyrs and witnesses to their faith, clearly disclose three major motives which produced the Christian communalism of the Hutterian Brethren which has endured for almost 500 years. Motive one is brotherly love in action, the strong longing of Christians for brotherly sharing and togetherness. Motive two is "Gelassenheit," a term derived from the mystics and almost untranslatable. It means yielding absolutely to the will of God with a dedicated heart, forsaking all selfishness and one's own will. Motive three, finally, is obedience to the divine commandments, understood as the inevitable consequence of the attitude of Gelassenheit. As one gives up one's own will, one naturally accepts God's commandments as the basis and guidepost for all further actions. Motive one: the idea of love - brotherly togetherness and mutual giving and sharing - was present among the brethren at all times. It was the very center of Jacob Huter's work. He visualized the brotherhood as a great family. Since in such a family all material things are shared as a matter of fact, this should also be the case in a true Gemeinschaft, or community. And so we read throughout our records confessions like this: "Love is the tie of perfection. ... Where she dwelleth she does not work partial but complete communion. It means having everything in common out of sheer love for the neighbor. "Where Christian love of the neighbor does not produce community in things temporal, there the blood of Christ does not cleanse from sin." In short, "Private property is the greatest enemy of Christian love." In love, all men are considered equal and united in the oneness of the Spirit. The references to communal living in the Book of Acts in these early tracts, however, serves not as a motivation but rather as an undergirding of this love-motive, as an exemplification of how it works, and as an assurance that this way is the right one. It was never to be understood as a strict commandment of God to be followed in obedience without any further questioning. The second motive is "Gelassenheit," a term of great richness, meaning self-surrender, yieldedness, the giving of one's self to God's guidance, even unto death. Among the Hutterites it also means the forsaking of all concern for personal property, thus leading almost naturally to a complete community of goods. At the earliest period this idea of Gelassenheit almost dominates the thought of the brethren. "To have all things in common, a free, untrammeled, yielding, willing heart in Christ is needed," writes Ulrich Stadler about 1536. "Whosoever is thus inwardly free and resigned (gelassen) in the Lord is also ready to surrender all temporal possessions." To the rejoinder that such a community of goods is not a commandment of the Lord, the same brother answers as follows: "To serve the saints in this way with all one's possession is true and genuine self-surrender (Gelassenheit), and it is also the way of brotherly love. In summa: one brother should serve the other, live and work for him, and no one should do anything for himself." Elsewhere we read, "If you want to become a disciple you must resign to such a Gelassenheit and must renounce all private property." The Hutterites, in their strict biblicism, became extremely sensitive and alert to the pitfalls of "mammon" in all its forms. "As the beetle lives in the dung, and the worm in the wood, so avarice (or greed) has its dwelling place in private property". Whosoever refuses communal living, they taught, shows obvious sympathy for avarice (or greed). And then they quote the example of the rich young man in the parable who could not enter the Kingdom of God because he was not willing to sell all that he had and give it to the poor. Avarice, the demon of possession, must therefore be overcome if true Gelassenheit is to be achieved. But once it has been overcome, there follows complete community of goods in brotherly togetherness and sharing. The ready acceptance of such complete community, incidentally, became the very touchstone of the regenerate. In particular it was also an indication whether or not a brother was capable and worthy of becoming a leader of the group. Taken all in all, the Hutterites represent a most original type of "theocratic society" or "theocratic communism," as it was once aptly called, a venture otherwise rather foreign to the western world. The brethren were aware of this antagonism to world and culture, but affirmed time and again that no other way to salvation was possible. "It is but through Gemeinschaft, that is communal living, that the blood of Christ may cleanse sinful man. Christ cannot help us unless we follow him all the way, without any reservation." This concept of "theocratic communism" naturally implies also the third motive, the principle of unconditional obedience by which we "bring into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ" (II Cor 10:5, as quoted now and then in Hutterite tracts). It means what the brethren never tired of repeating, that what really is needed for a true disciple is this: walking the "narrow path," breaking the self-will, and subsequently submitting to the will of God, whatever He may command. It is quite obvious that this principle of obedience involves a certain paradox: on the one hand, it is the most profound and most spiritual principle imaginable where the individual surrenders completely to divine guidance and ask nothing for himself, doing only that which he feels is required of him, even if it should lead to martyrdom. "Not my will be done, but Thine." That means genuine discipleship. It is the spirit of the first generation of Anabaptists, in particular Hutterites, who gave up everything in order to obey God. Suffering was accepted almost gladly as the inescapable consequence of such acts of obedience. Although this new life in perfect community of goods did bring a certain external security through mutual help and service, it meant a hard, daily internal struggle with that part of man's nature which insists upon self-will and personal possession. The brethren by no means belittled this desire. In fact, they liked to quote in this connection a jingle which in the Great Article Book of 1577 concludes the third article "Concerning community of goods": Communal living would not be hard If there were not such self-regard. Community, by Elmo Stoll, late pastor of the Christian Community in
Tennessee |