Wise as Serpents, Innocent as Doves: American Mennonites Engage Washington

Christian Century, May 7, 1997 by Frank Ramirez

By Keith Graber Miller. University of Tennessee Press, 314 pp., $36.00.

I belong to the Church of the Brethren, a fairly obscure denomination. When cornered and asked about who we are, we often cop out by shrugging and saying, "We're sort of like the Mennonites." But who are the Mennonites, and which ones are we talking about? Not far from where I live, three different Mennonite groups worship in separate buildings. Some drive buggies, some drive black cars and some drive cool cars. Yet we all started off this century pretty much in the same place and moved from plain garb to accommodation during its course. As the century closes everyone is looking back and asking how we got here and what has been gained and lost in our increasing accommodation to the world.

Keith Graber Miller's case study focuses on the development of the Mennonites' Washington office. Can a denomination which prizes its separation from the world and whose major tenets include nonviolence, which precludes participation in the world's structures, find a way to engage the powers without becoming one of them? Can the stiller im lande speak up while keeping their eyes down upon that old gospel plow? Miller's answer is yes, but only if the community continues to evaluate the means and methods used by those whom it has empowered to speak to the powers

Groups such as the Mennonites originally resisted the idea of a centralized office as a matter of principle. The Mennonite Central Committee began as a response to hunger among Russian Mennonites in the wake of the 1917 revolution. As the community developed a central organization, it became aware of the ways in which it was necessary to engage the U.S. government when it came to issues such as exemptions to the draft. And it became clear to the Mennonites that, in sharp contrast to other historic peace churches such as the Society of Friends, they were woefully unprepared to engage the powers in Washington.

The formation of a Washington office to represent the denomination led to a growing advocacy on issues that involved ministries to others. Miller catalogs levels of accommodation and shows how Mennonite decisions to sign on with others are made only after a painstaking process that seeks to reflect the separatist nature of the denomination.

Miller, associate professor of Bible, religion and philosophy at Indiana's Goshen College, notes that Mennonites north of the border see the issue quite differently. Canadian Mennonites, largely of Russian background, have had better experiences in cooperating with the government. American Mennonites historically had suffered greater persecution as ethnic Germans (the one thing Catholics and Protestants in Europe could agree on, after all, was that it was important to torture and kill Anabaptists, who did not believe in a church state). The American Revolution also put the quiet people at odds with their government, as did a series of wars in which their faith did not allow them to participate.

The creation of the central committee and the establishment of the Washington office did change the Mennonites. Miller suggests the experiment has been a success. The office has had a far greater impact on the Washington scene than one would expect from the denomination's relatively small membership. At the same time Mennonites have been changed as well, as their commitment to the gospel has called them to be more actively engaged in the world.

Reviewed by by Frank Ramirez, pastor of Elkhart (Indiana) Valley Church of the Brethren and a freelance writer.