photo: golancasterpa

Christmas is of course observed by Amish, and with an expected emphasis on family rather than Santa.  Amish-raised scholar John Hostetler shares in Amish Society that some Amish children may be "exposed to such customs [ie, Santa and the Christmas tree] if they attend public school, and some Amish parents come to the annual parochial school Christmas program.  Some Amish have adopted the practice of drawing names among themselves for buying presents." 

Hostetler, who grew up in Iowa and Pennsylvania, explains that "on Christmas Eve in my home, each child set a dish at his place at the table.  Our parents filled the dishes with many kinds of candy and nuts after we were asleep."

Amish do give gifts at Christmas, and Hostetler notes that "children who want a specific toy usually get it, but toys are generally simple and inexpensive."  While selling books in Amish communities, I can remember a number of instances when sets were tucked away by forward-looking parents as a Christmas surprise for the children. 

Hostetler goes on to explain that "married couples may buy surprises for each other, usually something they need, such as a new bed or a chair.  Girls may receive decorative dishes from their parents.  Gifts are frequently left on display in the sitting room until after New Year's Day."

On the matter of giving gifts, I often get questions on what types of gift are suitable, with the giver ofter concerned about potentially offending the receiver by a poorly-chosen gift. 

As a rule, and as Hostetler's description above indicates, gifts that have some function will likely be better-received by Amish than those that don't.  Simple toys for children are generally fine as well, and Amish-run dry goods shops often have an array of games and other basic toys for children. 

There is as usual variety among the Amish.  My mother usually likes to send baked goods along with me when I travel to visit friends in Pennsylvania (baked goods and most consumables for that matter, will never lead you astray).  I know she has given small games and if I recall even a book or two for the younger children. 

Once she wished to send a bottle of North Carolina wine along, which I vetoed as I could not recall whether wine was kosher in the family or not.  As it turned out, it probably would have been a safe bet, as she later helpfully reminded me that we had even been offered some homemade wine by the family head himself on one visit. (Click here for a previous post on the Amish and alcohol).

Brad Igou has some further information on Amish Christmas customs, as well as a nice description of an Amish parochial school Christmas program. 

And, best wishes to everyone this Christmas!  I'll be spending mine, Polish-style, at Grandma's place as usual. 

Christina Davidson of the Atlantic comments on consumerism, recession, and Amish life while dropping in on the Dover, Delaware Amish.  She also describes a good example of how change happens in Amish communities. 

48 Days to the Work You Love author Dan Miller makes an interesting observation on hay bales and Amish innovation on a trip to Holmes County, Ohio.

And, for any Italiophiles out there, my friend Andrea Borella has a book out, "Gli Amish", the first book on the Amish in Italian. 

Today, a quarter-century later, Union Grove remains a single church district in size.  Oddly, the document I am referencing mentions that the community built a "chuch house" in 1990, which I'm still puzzling over and may need to do a bit more digging on.  The Amish of Somerset County, PA, use church houses, and I thought they were unique in that practice among Amish, but that may not be the case. 

A decade after the settlement's founding, the Union Grove group gave birth to the experimental, and now-defunct community of Yanceyville, NC.

The Yanceyville community, existing from 1994 to 2001, was a rather unique one.  What set Yanceyville apart was the fact that it was a bilingual community, and one inclined to accomodate those wishing to join the Amish.  In fact, it was started by six families from Union Grove described as having "a desire to help some of the many seeking families." 

And such was the case, as a number of individuals of non-Plain background ended up joining this community, and even comprised half the member families at one point.  Preaching at Yanceyville was in English, dress was plain, and the horse and buggy was used.  But apparently due to the influence of an outside church, this community soon ceased to exist as an Amish settlement, and was followed by a short-lived Beachy church.

For whatever reason, North Carolina has not proven as attractive a destination for Amish as states such as Wisconsin, Missouri, or Kentucky, all of which have seen numerous new settlements formed over the past two decades.  Perhaps it has to do with climate, available land, or even building codes, which one Amish commentator notes are apparently stricter in NC when it comes to constructing new school buildings. 

Historically, at least one other Amish settlement has existed in North Carolina, however, in the vicinity of the Dismal Swamp in the northeastern corner of the state.  If you're interested, you can read the colorful history of that somewhat flammable settlement here.

(Sources:  New Order Amish Church Directory 1999 and 2004;  G.C. Waldrep, "The New Order Amish and Para-Amish Groups: Spiritual Renewal Within a Tradition", Mennonite Quarterly Review July 2008)

Looks like today the heater is getting raked over the coals in an article appearing in the Boston Herald (find the full-length version at MarketWatch.com).  Chuck Jaffe takes issue with the company's claim that it “Only uses about 9 cents electric an hour; so turn down your thermostat and never be cold again.”  Click the link to get his take on why that assertion is a bit misleading.  Another report critiques new claims that purchasers of the heater get to take part in a "heating bill relief program", which the author notes "sounds like a government rebate" when it fact it's little more than sales schtick. 

I outlined some of the issues I had with the heater in a blog post last February, as well as in an article appearing in the Washington Post in March.  My biggest points of contention were with the marketing Heat Surge was employing, which I feel crossed a certain line.  This was most evident in an ad featuring those two Amish staples, champagne and bleached blondes, appearing in Rolling Stone magazine. 

Recently I've been able to dig into the issue a bit deeper, and will be sharing more in future.  No matter how you feel about Heat Surge's marketing strategy, from a business standpoint, the heater is a hit, and like Black Friday and duck hunting, the beginning of Amish heater season could become an annual autumn occurrence.

Transgression and Punishment

First, what was intended in the "no moral question" sentence.  This can be misleading in that I introduced the post as being about the issue of the bishops failing to report abuse, and then made this statement which was in essence referring to something else, and my language was regretfully not too precise either. 

The statement was meant to refer to the idea of a private system by which a religious group, the Amish in this case, would render religious justice for what would be considered by society as criminal offenses.  With punishment for all offenses in such a system typically amounting to a few weeks in the Bann (which may be serious enough for those in the Bann mulling the afterlife, but in one measure pales in comparison to, say, the disruption to a life due to years of incarceration), one can imagine that there would be a highly diminished fear of life-altering retribution deterring abusers, or other potential offenders.  Fear of excommunication is one thing, and Amish have spent short spells in jail in the past when standing up against civil law which has conflicted with religious belief, but as a deterrent I have to imagine that the prospect of six weeks of eating apart would pale in comparison to the thought of two decades detached from your community and deprived of freedom in prison.

The potential for harm to occur undeterred in such a system which delivers what amounts to a comparatively mild religious/social punishment would be huge.  I'm not saying that Amish such as those in this Missouri community would handle all transgressions/crimes in the same manner, but essentially what occurred here was a case of serious abuse known to a significant number of people.  Were the same thing to happen in other societies, and sexual abuse were to become known to a number of people in a given community, the response would likely be much different. 

I assume most would feel a strong obligation to report such knowledge--first and foremost in the interest of protecting children from further instances of abuse--which the people involved here presumably did not due to an understanding that such issues are handled within the church system of discipline.  It's unclear here when forgiveness was rendered, or at what point the bishops became aware, or if Schwartz confessed and then continued in the behavior, and so on.  But what is clear is that Schwartz committed his acts of abuse against his two victims repeatedly over a year's time, indicating that his behavior was recurrent, and thus one could conclude posed a legitimate continuing danger to his community, regardless of whether he had been forgiven by them.

By comparison, the potential for harm done by Amish removing their children from school at grade eight, an area where Amish have achieved an exemption from a legal obligation that most others do not have based in a religious argument, is minimal, or at least of a much different nature.  Some may argue that there could be "harm" done in this area, if one considers lack of school education harmful, but it is of a decidedly different nature to physical and psychological abuse which could result and continue unchecked due to the disproportionally lenient punishment in the theoretical system of justice described above. 

I am not a lawyer, but in the first case, it seems one would be hard-pressed to find an argument that a religious group has a right to resolve what would be considered extremely serious and harmful offenses in such a manner, outside of the established system of justice.  I know that is not what was originally being discussed here so it is not really the issue, but in any case that was the original, not well-explained, and perhaps obvious, point I wished to make.  If I'm still off-track here, I welcome any insights.

But "did the bishops as religious leaders have an obligation to report a confession?"  seems a different issue to whether they should have a religiously-based right to adjudicate serious transgressions off the legal grid.  There may very well be religious grounds in their defense on this point.  And in this aspect, the case has much to do with "religious matters".  Other questions include:  How is the bishops' situation or the Amish congregation's situation when hearing a public confession different from that of a Catholic priest hearing confessions?  Why are four bishops involved?  Do other members of the community who heard the confession or knew of the offenses have an obligation as well? These are issues which I don't have answers on and will leave for now but welcome comments on.  

The Two Kingdoms paradox

A point was raised by reader Jacob in response to the previous post.  Do Amish consider those that render justice immoral, or those acts themselves immoral?  The answer to this question may lie in an examination of the "two kingdoms" doctrine which Amish adhere to.  The doctrine, which I mentioned briefly in the previous post, is on first read seemingly simple.  It is at the same time paradoxical.   

According to Article XIII of the Dordrecht Confession which Amish accept before baptism, Amish view civil government as being instituted by God "for the punishment of evil and the protection of the good as well as to govern the world and to provide good regulations and policies in cities and countries.  Therefore, we must not resist, despise, or condemn the state.  We should recognize it as a minister of God.  Further, we ought to honor and obey it and be ready to perform good works in its behalf insofar as it is not in conflict with God's law and commandment...". 

Amish have resisted the state when they see its law to conflict with God's, as in the case of SMV triangles, Social Security, and so on.  Amish themselves opt out of participating in civil institutions which enforce the law as well as political office, which often requires the assertion of state will upon others by force.  Scholar of the Amish Paton Yoder notes that while accepting the state as instituted by God, Amish readily identify it with coercion, an aspect "which most contradicts their own world-view." 

Obviously Amish do rely on the state's military protection, law enforcement, and agents who render justice to keep them safe.  To take one extreme, in the Ed Gingerich murder case, Amish from Gingerich's community fearing for their own safety pleaded that he be locked away after he was released from a prison psychiatric ward just a few years after brutally killing his wife.  The families of Nickel Mines certainly appreciated the selfless service Pennsylvania police officers performed in the aftermath of the killings of their children.  Do Amish solicit and accept such aid, yet duplicitously hold the private opinion that the state and its agents are committing an immoral act by protecting them from these dangerous people through their 'coercion'?  I find it hard to reconcile the ideas that Amish who are protected by those agents of the world then privately condemn them and their actions as immoral, especially in cases when they seek the aid themselves. 

Yet Paton Yoder notes early Anabaptist Hans Schnell's writing on the issue, which convey the notions that "the kingdom of this world is based on vengeance;  the kingdom of Christ is based on love.  The magistrate who, as an agent of the worldly government, metes out vengeance puts himself outside Christ's kingdom."  Yoder explains that 20th-century Amish leaders, ever-mindful of tradition, rely heavily on the centuries-old principles found within these old writings, leading one to assume that Schnell's words continue to hold particular relevance today.  But in the years following Schnell, Yoder notes, as Anabaptists began to be relieved of a persecution which perhaps originally inspired their brand of two kingdoms thinking, tones toward agents of worldy government seemed to soften and change, with Anabaptists actually expressing a hope that individual agents of friendlier governments may gain an eternal reward after all. 

So what do Amish really think?  Clearly Amish see a division, which results in a tension.  They accept the state, and humbly defer to it when it does not infringe upon the laws of the spiritual kingdom, but do not identify with its ways.  Yet without agents of the state to do the dirty work of keeping worldly laws, chaos, death, and a disruption of God's order would ensue. 

Yoder continues, paraphrasing Amishman Elmo Stoll: "In short, the Amish believe that Christians should respect their government, pray for those in power, pay required taxes, and obey the laws of the land except when they conflict with God's laws."  Yoder goes on to note that "It matters not that the government uses tax money for armaments or other immoral purposes.  Most Amish would agree that "when a tax is paid, it is no longer our money, and it is not our responsibility to dictate how it is to be used"...Similarly, the Christian should not tell the government when it may use the sword."  Yoder explains that this Amish renouncement of political duty has been described as a "strategy of withdrawal."

Some have made a point of criticism of Amish resulting from this paradoxical stance.  Yoder describes the paradox of the Amish view of the two kingdoms as a dilemma inherited from early Anabaptists, and one which is to this day unresolved. I cannot do the issue justice myself here, as this is a very basic addressing of it, but I would direct those interested to Paton Yoder's treatment of the two kingdoms doctrine in The Amish and the State.

How common is abuse?

Finally, there is the remaining question of how common abuse is in Amish communities.  Sexual abuse is an unpleasant topic.  I don't particularly enjoy writing about this on the blog, just as I don't particularly relish discussing issues such as "puppy mills".  But, I felt I ought to address it as a legitimate issue affecting some Amish. 

As I write in the original post, I'd be quite reluctant to say that sex abuse is a widespread problem across Amish society.  It may very well be a problem that occurs in isolation, and even to a significant degree in some communities.  A system of discipline which resolves issues of sin and transgression primarily internally may lead to conditions which allow abuse to occur and persist, especially when key principles of obedience and submission to authority become detached from a guiding core Christian morality.

This article by Legal Affairs senior editor Nadya Labi examines a number of abuse cases in Amish communities.  Labi does not paint all Amish with the same brush, noting in the lead-in that the examples of abuse she cites originate from "some places".  Reading the article I notice that many or all of the cases she describes seem to occur in Swartzentruber or other more conservative communities.  The default operating procedure in the cases she describes is church confession, a short stay in the Bann, and a return to 'normal', but with no alerting of the authorities, and usually with a continuation of the abusive behavior. 

On the other hand, since writing the previous post, I have also received Amish input on the Missouri case that without question Schwartz should answer to the state for his crimes.

As to how widespread abuse is, I simply have no way of knowing concretely.  But if I had to I would guess that the stance of this Amish informant toward crimes such as sexual abuse would be the more commonly-held one, and I'd like to suppose the much more commonly-held one.  I hope that is correct. 

Four bishops in a Missouri Amish community have been charged with failing to report sexual abuse inflicted by an adult member of the community upon two children.  Clearly there is no moral question that abuse of any kind is a criminal matter, and not one meant to be handled within the bounds of a local Ordnung.  Yet that is apparently how this matter was "resolved", and authorities are charging the bishops, as people with "responsibility for the care of children", with neglecting their duty towards the abuse victims.

Occasionally you hear of similar cases of unreported crime in Amish communities.  Yet I'd hardly call covering up crimes standard operating procedure among Amish.  Amish subscribe to a 'two kingdoms' theology, seeing a distinction between the spiritual kingdom, and the worldly kingdom of secular government. 

Yet, Amish readily submit to the law of the land in areas where the worldly kingdom does not impose itself on the spiritual one.  While Amish have refused to adhere to certain laws which clash with religious beliefs, such as schooling past the 8th grade, or in some instances, on slow-moving-vehicle triangle requirement for carriages, this Missouri case obviously has nothing to do with religious matters.  

That true crimes may go unreported in some communities I feel is a reflection on local congregations and not upon Amish society as a whole.  For further reading, this was not long ago addressed on the blog, in a post examining Amish cooperation with law enforcement.      

Meanwhile, other settlements founded in the state at roughly the same time have grown and thrived.  The Nappanee and Adams County settlements approach 40 and 50 church districts respectively, while the Elkhart-Lagrange settlement, founded just 7 years before Kokomo, today numbers over 130.  Why is Kokomo, unlike its neighbors, a small size today?

Later, ranks increased as families began moving in from other communities, and particularly from the Arthur, Illinois settlement, which resulted in the formation of 2 church districts in 1908.  The peak of the Kokomo community likely occurred in the mid-1930s. 

After this period, according to the history recorded in the Nappanee Amish directory, “a serious decline took place.”  Old Order Amish joined Beachy Amish and Mennonite groups and also moved to other Midwestern Amish communities.  Over the first half of the 20th century, nearly 500 church members in the Kokomo settlement either affiliated with higher churches, moved out, or simply left the church altogether.  

Today, the Kokomo settlement is uncommon among Amish communities in that it permits the use of tractors in the field.  According to Meyers and Nolt’s An Amish Patchwork, Kokomo Amish marry at a slightly older age than other settlements in the state (age 23 for men and 22 for women), and have slightly fewer children on average, at 6 per family. 

As in many other Amish settlements, small businesses and the carpentry trade have become more common in this community as farming has declined.  Unlike in the Elkhart-Lagrange settlement, Kokomo Amish do not seek employment in local factories.  This, as Kraybill and Nolt explain in Amish Enterprise, is due to the unionized nature of local factories as well as a high school diploma requirement. 

For that matter, Amish in general are against union membership, and those who join unions face excommunication.  Unions are looked upon unfavorably by Amish for a number of reasons.  One reason is that Amish feel that the means unions employ to achieve their aims, such as work strikes, qualify as use of force, and thus clash with the tenet of nonresistance adhered to universally by Amish.  

Sources: Nappanee Amish Directory 2001; An Amish Patchwork: Indiana's Old Orders in the Modern World; Amish Enterprise: From Plows to Profits

Earlier in the year I posted on Daylight Savings and Indiana Amish and some of the issues Amish in Elkhart and Lagrange counties had with DST.  By the way, if you haven't already, remember to knock your clocks back an hour today.