Amish Anabaptists in Switzerland in 1861:

Ch. Aug. Ramseyer's Letter to Shem Zook, February 1, 1861
as copied by Bishop Jacob Swartzendruber in 1862

Translated and Edited by Leonard Gross and Paton Yoder

---

Introduction

This letter, written when the Amish in America were in the process of schism and their counterparts in Switzerland and contiguous lands were already showing signs of disintegration, has significance for both geographic settings.
The writer of this letter, Ch. Aug. Ramseyer, identifies himself as the leader ("Lehrer") of a small flock of Amish Anabaptists in Switzerland which had separated from other congregations with Amish roots. But we know that at the time of his death in 1895 he was a Baptist. Evidently his little group had left him, and being theologically minded, he had joined the growing Baptist denomination.1 His history of the Baptists, Histoire des Baptistes (Neuchâtel, 1897), was published two years after his death.2

The letter is addressed to Shem Zook, who lived in Mifflin County, Pennsylvania, and is clearly a response to a letter Ramseyer had received from Zook in which the latter had made some inquiries about Amish and Mennonite beliefs and practices in Europe, particularly in Switzerland.

That Zook, a layman, should make inquiry of an Amish minister in Switzerland about Anabaptist church affairs in that country is unusual and surprising. But Shem Zook was no ordinary Amishman. Quite certainly he was the best known Amish layman of his century. It seems he gave equal attention to his business activities and to his church-related interests.3
At the time that this exchange of letters was taking place, Zook and the bishop of his congregation, Solomon K. Beiler, were deeply involved in those controversies which were coming to a head within the ministry of the Amish church. Before the end of the year 1861, both Zook and his bishop would become involved, with others, in proposing and planning for the introduction of annual Amish ministers' conferences. It was hoped that these Amish ministers, in conference, could restore harmony in the church. Such conferences were initiated in 1862, but failed to restore unity.

Although we do not have Zook's letter of inquiry, the questions which Zook asked of Ramseyer can be ascertained by the latter's methodical answers. Most of Zook's questions revolved around the condition of Mennonite and Amish churches in Switzerland, a number of which related to the issues which were rending the Amish church in America. Zook wondered whether the Anabaptists in Switzerland were strict or lenient in their administration of church discipline, especially in the matter of shunning.

Zook had evidently also asked some detailed questions about the way in which Swiss Anabaptists baptized, particularly as to whether they baptized in flowing water. Given Zook's preoccupation with this ritual, and the details of its administration by Amish bishops, his inquiry is not surprising. Already by 1850 Zook and his bishop had come to regard the traditional Amish pattern of baptizing in the house or barn -- where church services were normally held -- as unscriptural. They proposed to take applicants to a stream and baptize them while kneeling therein.4
Of theological significance as well is Ramseyer's view that written confessions of faith, although useful, take second place to Scripture, the sole "binding principle" for faith and conduct.

Also of import is the author's observation that although nonresistance was still a tenet of faith among the traditional Swiss Anabaptist groups, the Dutch and French Anabaptists had forsaken this tenet to a considerable degree.
And finally, Ramseyer's analysis of the various Swiss Anabaptist groups, although certainly not complete, still contains useful information on the nature of the Swiss Anabaptist groups in the year 1861.

Concerning the Authenticity of this Manuscript

As the caption of this document indicates, it is a copy of an original, and is therefore subject to the same critical scrutiny normally given to any copy. According to the note on the envelope in which it was kept, this copy was made by Jacob Swartzendruber in 1862.

How the original letter got into the hands of Jacob Swartzendruber, first Amish bishop in Johnson County, Iowa, is explained by Shem Zook's note, appended by Swartzendruber, to Ramseyer's letter. According to that note, Zook sent Ramseyer's letter westward to several Amish bishops and ministers in Ohio and Iowa, asking each one to send it on to still another. The last named to receive it was Jacob Swartzendruber (1800-1868), of Johnson County, Iowa. Already a minister, he had moved from Somerset County, Pa., to Johnson County, Iowa, in 1851. Only two years later he was ordained to the office of bishop. Possibly Swartzendruber was not comfortable with keeping such an important letter, and so copied it and returned the original to Zook, or perhaps he sent it on to still another minister.

The strongest reason for accepting the authenticity and accuracy of this copy is the integrity of Bishop Swartzendruber. But there is also internal evidence that this document is a careful copy of a lost original. The German script which is used in this copy is written in very small characters, on lined paper, with two lines of script between each line, a practice which Swartzendruber sometimes followed in copying other documents. Equally significant is the fact that Zook's questions to Ramseyer (as re-phrased by Ramseyer in his answers) are precisely what one would expect Zook to be asking in 1861, in the heat of the Great Schism then in progress in the Amish church in America. Similarly, it seems that Ramseyer's responses could only be those of a knowledgeable Swiss Anabapist.

This copy of a 1861 letter to Shem Zook was found among a collection of Swartzendruber Family Papers given to the Archives of the Mennonite Church by Sanford Swartzendruber in August, 1979. They were accessioned and added to the Daniel B. Swartzendruber Collection in March, 1980 (Box 3, Folder 11). These dates will explain to the researcher why John Umble, who cataloged Bishop Jacob Swartzendruber's "library" in 1946 did not include it in his listing,5 and also why Joe Springer did not make a typescript of it in the early 1970s when he was examining and copying parts of this collection. Only when Steven Reschly recently examined the Swartzendruber Collection was this letter brought to the attention of researchers.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _

Translation of Ch. Aug. Ramseyer's letter from Switzerland to Shem Zook, Mifflin County, Pennsylvania, February 1, 1861

Written on the envelope in which this copy of Ramseyer's letter was enclosed is the following:

Copy [of] a letter written by Ch. Aug. Ramseyer from Bern, Switzerland, to S[h]em Zook, Mifflin Co., Pa. Dated the 1st of Feb. 1861. Copied by Jacob Swartzendruber, 1862.6 It would more correctly be called a Confession of Faith.7

Bern, Switzerland, February 1, 1861

Grace and peace be with you dear friend and brother Shem Zook and with all those in that land who, I hope, with you as with me, genuinely love the Lord Jesus Christ, even if in other respects you may be stricter or more lenient, rough or gentle, as has been mentioned.

I have received your letter of the 21st of the past September and based on the assumption that it stems from a heart, enquiring in [the spirit of] love toward the Lord and toward the brethren on this side of the ocean, I do not delay answering your questions insofar as I am presently able.

Concerning the first question, whether I am a preacher of the so-called strict, or of the more lenient Mennonites,8 this question is difficult to answer, inasmuch as these expressions are seldom used and understood in this country, and here in this country there are other groups which are narrower or broader in their views than we are. For example, the so-called New Anabaptists (Apostolic Christian Church) are narrower; they cannot even pray with people from other groups. Some fellowships are broader, which also admit to the Lord's Supper those who were only baptized in their infancy. And between these two extremes, there are in Switzerland yet divers gradations.

As to whether we are strict or lenient,9 perhaps you can best decide if I tell you that we consider the confessions of faith in the Martyrs Mirror, with which you are certainly familiar, to be in conformity with Scripture. At the same time we do not set this up as a binding principle of our faith and conduct; but instead, we embrace solely the holy Scriptures, Old and New Testaments, as a rule of conduct and standard, by which we evaluate and judge every confession, and not the converse.

It is our firm position that our confession must be written not so much in a document, but much more in the heart. And to the extent that we have need of something written, we seek here to follow Paul's instruction, where he writes to the Corinthians that we should learn from him and from Apollos not to think [of men] more than is written: "Let no one puff himself up in favor of one against another" [1 Cor. 4:6]. So we need the above-mentioned confessions of faith in the Martyrs Mirror only for those who are not acquainted with us, to provide a brief understanding of what we are and what we teach, and we uphold these confessions merely insofar as they agree with Scripture.

Just as we are not to seek honor among men and women, and since it is not in our domain to name ourselves after Paul or Apollos, for the same reason we seldom use the name Mennonite, and then only to give to those to whom this name is familiar as concise a statement as possible as to who we are, and all the more so since we Swiss Anabaptists already came into being before Menno, so that he is not the founder of our church. And although we recognize him as a chosen vessel of God, we still respect him only insofar as he taught in accordance with Scripture, and should it be that he may have erred in something, this we leave to his account.10

Now concerning the several points in which the Mennonites differ from one another, we believe in the holy Trinity, that is, in one God with three personalities, yet not like mortal persons, but that these three are in one another and penetrate one another, in this manner being one, as Christ says to Philip: "Do you not believe that I am in the Father and the Father in me" [Jn. 14:10]? And, the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father [Jn. 14:16-17].

We believe that Jesus Christ is God from eternity and that he became human within time, to redeem us through his death from the power of Satan and sin and to make us partakers of his life and of his glory. We believe that although he became flesh through Mary, his humanity notwithstanding, he is not only the son of man and the son of David, but also the Son of God.

We believe that the Holy Spirit is a real being, and not merely a divine strength in people, as some Dutch Mennonites11 of the present time claim. And we believe that we are sealed by Him for the day of redemption.
In summary, we believe that God -- the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who is God over all things, as promised in eternity -- so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son so that all who believe on Him will not be lost, but have eternal life.

2. We believe in the inherited depravity of man since the Fall of man, and therefore we also believe that Satan is a real being, and not merely a human construct, as some Dutch Mennonites presently claim. We also believe that Jesus Christ's actions were adequate for the sins of humankind, so that in eternity no person will be lost because of inherited depravity, but that all who are lost will be rejected because they did not accept Jesus Christ through faith, not becoming obedient to him, as it is written: Whoever believes on the Son has eternal life, but whoever is disobedient to the Son will not see life, but God's wrath remains with him.12

3. We believe that to attain salvation, in addition to the necessary amending of life, a complete spiritual renewal or rebirth is also needed, without which no one can see the kingdom of God, much less enter into it. We believe that we as sinners are justified by faith alone, without the works of the law, before we ever did a good work pleasing to God, as has been richly testified to us by God that our sins are forgiven gratis for Jesus Christ's sake. We further believe that if we therefore turn to God with a view to accepting his forgiveness, we will be created unto good works through Jesus Christ to do the works which God has prepared, for the purpose of walking therein. Through this we give testimony that God has rightly reckoned our faith as righteousness, so that what James wrote will be true for us, that we are justified by works and not by faith alone.

4. Concerning baptism: We baptize no under-age children, but only such persons of such age who confess their faith, and to whom the Holy Spirit gives witness that they are God's children. But if anyone should deceive us and profess to be converted for whom it was not true, then this is known to God. And if it becomes public knowledge, then such a one would be put out if he or she is not converted.

We baptize only in water, actually in clean water and preferably in running water, if it is possible. But if flowing water is not available, then we do it in other [water], for we do not read from Scripture that flowing water is essential. The reason John states as to why John the Baptist baptized in the Jordan near Aenon [Jn. 3:23] was that much--meaning enough--water was there.13

Concerning the kind and the mode of the service, at this time [there is] no fast rule, but rather each time being led by the impelling of the Spirit, considering the nature of the site, sometimes by complete immersion, sometimes by pouring water over the applicant for baptism who is in water with a triple surge of water, in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Whether the applicant kneels through this, lies down, sits, or stands,14 such is adjusted according to the depth of the available water, and according to his own desire. I do not place much significance in such matters, but rather in the fact that this step is taken on the basis of a pure conscience, and in other respects that it be as much as possible like a burial and complete washing and bath. How this is carried out depends on the conditions present at the time.
Otherwise we do not argue about such matters. Rather, we recognize any baptism which is an expression of faith and obedience, according to the best knowledge and conscience, and [the existing] physical setting. But on principle I never baptize someone who is not in water by means of mere pouring.15 Furthermore, we never speculate about the actual meaning of the Greek word, baptisein, whether it means immersion, or can mean something else, since after all so very few people understand Greek, and [even] the scholars are not agreed thereupon.

5. Concerning the breaking of bread, we observe the Lord's Supper as often as we can, when possible every month, and we allow baptized believers to partake of it, but those only in whom one can sense the life of Christ and whose works do not betray their oral confession.

6. We also observe footwashing of the saints, firstly, when brethren in the faith from a distance visit us, and secondly (usually, yet not always) before the Lord's Supper. Since the three Gospel writers who record the instituting of the Lord's Supper say not a word about footwashing and since, on the other hand, John mentions footwashing, yet talks about the Lord's Supper only in passing, we therefore do not believe the intention of the apostles had been that footwashing necessarily is to be connected to the Lord's Supper. Nevertheless, since Christ performed it in connection with the Lord's Supper, we therefore consider it to be legitimate for us to do likewise.

But we observe footwashing before the Lord's Supper, firstly, because we read according to the corrected Biblical interpretation in John, Chapter 13:2-4: "After the supper was prepared Jesus stands up from the evening meal,"16 et cetera; and secondly, because we see this observance not only as a sign of humility, but also as an admonition to be spiritually and physically ready to serve and [as a symbol] of brotherliness, and as a sign from God that he washes us from sin in the blood of Jesus daily, and that we are to sit at his table as those who have been washed. It is also instructive for us that just as we wash one another's feet until they are clean, so we should also beware of blackening, slandering, and defaming one another. Even much more than this, we should strive to cleanse and sanctify one another.

7. Concerning marriage, we allow it [only] in the Lord, that is, with a believing person who through baptism has put on Christ. But if anyone should err so far that he should marry an unbeliever or a baptized unbeliever, he would thereby have separated himself from Christ and his church, and could be received again only after true repentance and conversion, no matter whether or not his spouse conceived. For we consider marriage to be insoluble except in the case of adultery.
8. Concerning church discipline, minor offenses call for a warning and, if necessary, exclusion from the Lord's Supper, and greater or persistent smaller [offences] call for the ban with shunning -- shunning however without conjugal separation,17 unless it should come to the place that the banned spouse should become a snare to the other. In such a case this one is at liberty to live alone until the situation gets better. Nevertheless in this matter the actual one who discerns [the case] must weigh carefully the individual's unique circumstances.

I pass over the remaining points since [here] I think we are no different from other Mennonites. The only thing that I still want to mention is that we hold fast to nonresistance, which in some churches, especially in Holland and France, has been abandoned.

Your two final questions remain to be answered: Concerning the number of Mennonites in Switzerland and the total of their membership, I can give you no satisfactory answer at this time, since I am not well acquainted with all of them. But I hope to be able to give you accurate information at a later time.

As far as I know there are six groups of Anabaptists in Switzerland: 1. The Zürcher Baptists (regular Baptists).18 2. The Neugatter Baptists. These have open fellowship with those who baptize infants. These two groups are not nonresistant and baptize by immersion. 3. The New Anabaptists (Apostolic Christian Church) are nonresistant, practice the ban and shunning but not footwashing, and usually baptize by immersion. This third group is the largest and also the narrowest, for they anathematize all others. 4. The Old Anabaptists of Bern are nonresistant, but do not shun or practice footwashing. They baptize by pouring, in rooms. They have two congregations, a fairly large one in the Freibergen with four full ministers [elders], and one in the Emmenthal with two full ministers. These number about 180 members. 5. The Neuchâtel19 and Basel Old Anabaptists, or so-called Amish, practice the ban and footwashing, but are asleep concerning shunning and nonresistance, and baptize by pouring. I am not well acquainted with the fellowship in the canton of Basel. The fellowship in the canton of Neuchâtel numbers something over one-hundred members and has two or three full ministers. 6. Finally, my group, whose teaching I have briefly written about above, usually classifies itself as Amish, and a few years ago split from the Neuchâtel Amish church because this group is presently in decline and resists every reform. In a word, there remained no longer any discipline and order. For that reason six of us split off and organized collectively and we now have only sixteen members, since one of the six first members has already died. Most of us [in this group] live in the canton of Neuchâtel, where I myself lived earlier and where I plan to return soon.

These are the accounts, dear friend and brother, which I presently can give. The Lord willing, I can write you more detailed accounts later. And if it is agreeable to you to give me further reports from America, I want very much to accept them as a way to strengthen and encourage the fellowship of the heart with my otherwise unknown children of God, with which anticipation, with brotherly greeting, I append my name as your insignificant
Ch. Aug. Ramseyer
My address from now on will be: Ch. Aug. Ramseyer, In couvet., C[anto]n Neuchâtel, Switzerland.

As the note below indicates, Shem Zook, the recipient of this letter, forwarded it to Joas Yoder and others, accompanied by said note. When the letter eventually got to Swartzendruber in Iowa, he evidently made a copy of it and appended Zook's note to his copy.

February 28, 1861
Friend and Brother Joas Yoder20
After you have read this letter, then hand it to J. K. Yoder and let old father Brand[t] see it also, and then send it quickly to (gross) Mose Miller,21 and you, dear friend and brother M. Miller, when you have shown the letter to your fellow ministers, then send it to Jacob Swartzendruber,22 Iowa City, Johnson Co., Iowa.

From your insignificant friend, Shem Zook

Leonard Gross is consulting archivist at the Archives of the Mennonite church. Paton Yoder is author of Tradition and Transition.

---

1 Letter, Delbert Gratz to Paton Yoder, 12 October 1995.
2 Mennonitsches Lexikon, III, 427.
3 See John A. Hostetler, "Memoirs of Shem Zook (1798-1880): A Biography," Mennonite Quarterly Review 38 (July 1964), 280-303, and S. Duane Kauffman, Mifflin County Amish and Mennonite Story, 1791-1991 (Mifflin County Mennonite Historical Society, 1991) for further identification of Shem Zook.
4 Concerning Zook's and Beiler's preoccupation with the stream baptism issue see Paton Yoder, Tradition and Transition: Amish Mennonites and Old Order Amish, 1800-1900 (Scottdale, Pa.: Herald Press, 1991), 121-27.
5 John Umble, "Catalog of an Amish Bishop's Library," Mennonite Quarterly Review 20 (July 1946), 230-39.
6 See the editors' introduction as to how Ramseyer's letter got into Swartzendruber's hands.
7 Zook had asked many questions of Ramseyer about Amish faith and practice in Europe, and Ramseyer had answered them quite thoroughly, all of which led Swartzendruber to liken the letter to a confession of faith.
8 European Amish of the nineteenth century often called themselves Mennonites.
9 Zook had evidently asked Ramseyer whether or not the Amish in Europe were strict or lenient in their administration of church discipline. The term, streng (strict), was used by American Amish primarily in connection with the ban and shunning. Here, as elsewhere in his letter, Ramseyer implies that Zook's questions are a little simplistic; he cannot answer in a word or two.
10 Ramseyer had already emphasized that the Swiss Anabaptists accepted the Dordrecht Confession of Faith (with its Netherlands origins) only to the extent that it was Schriftgemäss (in agreement with Scripture) and now asserts that Menno Simons' life and writings must certainly be subject to the same scrutiny. Ramseyer may also be reflecting a Swiss Anabaptist disinclination to be tied too closely to the Mennonites of The Netherlands.
11 Here as elsewhere, Ramseyer exhibits some comprehension of the currents of theology of his day and, in particular, of the prevailing Mennonite theology in The Netherlands.
12 Clearly this passage is lifted from Jn. 3:36. However the Lutheran and Froschauer versions of this verse speak of God's wrath falling on those who do not believe, whereas Ramseyer writes of the wrath of God falling on those who do not obey. The NRSV supports Ramseyer's version. Ramseyer's emphasis on obedience is pushed further later when he asserts that ultimately man is justified by faith and works (Section 3, below).
13 These references to baptism in flowing water must certainly be a response to Zook's inquiries on this subject! In 1860-61 the Amish ministers and laity of Mifflin County were preoccupied with this question. Ramseyer responds that the biblical criterion on this question is that there be enough water, not that the water be flowing.
14 Ramseyer may be twitting Zook about his preoccupation with a matter which he, Ramseyer, considers to be of little or no consequence.
15 The German word "Besprengung," which can also be translated "sprinkling," has been translated here and below as "pouring," given the Anabaptist and later Mennonite baptismal practice, which has consistently been either "pouring" or immersion, but not sprinkling. See the Mennonite Encyclopedia, "Baptism" (esp. I:226), and the Mennonitisches Lexikon, "Taufe" (esp. IV:287) for the historical background.
16 The Lutheran version reads, "after the supper," etc.
17 That a guilty spouse could continue in conjugal relationship with his or her marriage partner, but otherwise be shunned by such, was an option never considered by any Amish fellowship in nineteenth-century America.
18 The term "(regular baptists)", including the parentheses, appears in English in this document. This may be an interpolation by the copier, Jacob Swartzendruber.
19 In German, Neuenburg.
20 The identity of this Joas Yoder is not clear. The other ministers to whom Zook was forwarding this letter were Amish bishops, so one could assume that he meant to send the letter, in like manner, to the bishop of the Wayne County congregation. But in 1862 the bishop at that place was not Joas Yoder. J(ohn) K. Yoder, to whom Joas was to "hand" Ramseyer's letter, had taken that office in 1859. That leaves two mysteries: Who was Joas Yoder, and why was the letter not addressed to J(ohn) K. Yoder? The only solution which comes to mind is the remote possibility that Zook thought that yet another Yoder, Jacob D. Yoder, was still bishop of the Wayne County Congregation at this time, and was sending this letter to him for this reason. But obviously this leaves unanswered the questions of why Zook called the addressee Joas, and why he did not know that he (that is, Jacob D. Yoder) had been forced out of office in 1859. Shem Zook knew both Jacob D. and John K. Yoder, for both had moved earlier, in their adult years, from Zook's Mifflin County to Wayne County, Ohio.
21 Gross Mose was bishop of the Walnut Creek congregation in Holmes County, Ohio. More progressive than the other Holmes County congregations, the latter broke fellowship with Mose's congregation before the year 1861 was out.
22 Whereas the other Amish ministers to which Zook was sending this letter were already known to be moderately change-minded (as contrasted to tradition-minded), which direction Bishop Jacob Swartzendruber of Johnson County, Iowa, would take was not clear as of 1861. In the years which followed, however, he gravitated toward the traditionalist position.

---

Mennonite Historical Bulletin, July, 1996