|
Bethlehem’s Œconomy: 1741-1762
by Katherine Carté
When the Moravians came to the "Forks of the
Delaware" in eastern Pennsylvania,
they quickly set about building a town that would become the center for
Moravian missionaries and itinerant preachers in North America. A five
hundred-acre tract located at the confluence of the Lehigh River and
the
Monocacy Creek offered the perfect location for their
endeavor—fertile
land near to white settlements and to the Indian lands to the west. The
northern banks of the Lehigh sloped up gently, reminding the Moravians
of the hill overlooking Herrnhut, in far-off Saxony. On the opposite
side,
a mountain separated the Lehigh Valley from Philadelphia, fifty-five
miles
to the south. The Monocacy Creek’s swiftly moving water
provided them with
the natural resources necessary for building in the wilderness. In
1741,
during his yearlong sojourn to America, Count Zinzendorf celebrated
Christmas
in the new town, and formally bestowed on it the name of
Bethlehem.
Although he never settled in America,
Zinzendorf’s ideas were important
for the town’s development. He believed the Moravians should
support their
preaching and missionary work through their own resources, rather than
relying on payment from the communities and congregations they served.
This would allow the Moravians to be seen as independent servants of
the
Savior, not slaves to the people they tried to help and teach.
Financing
such extensive projects was no easy task, however, for life on the
frontier
typically offered little room for luxuries or surplus production. To be
profitable and to support its missionaries, the Moravians had to be
efficiently
organized. Bethlehem and the adjacent communities of Nazareth and the
"upper
places," were organized into a single, communal unit, known as the
Oeconomy—the
Greek word for household. No one received wages for the work he or she
performed. Instead, each person received hearty meals in the choir
dining
rooms, simple clothing, and shelter in the choir houses. Bethlehem
housed
the Moravians’ craft houses, such as the black smith shop and
the tannery.
Nazareth, where the land was better suited for farming, was the
breadbasket
for the settlers. Situated ten miles apart, these communities worked in
harmony for the common purpose of supporting the Moravian evangelical
and
educational mission.
The Oeconomy endured for two decades. During this
time, Bethlehem was
the home of hundreds of Moravians and dozens of industries. A
gristmill,
a cobbler’s shop, a weaving house, and a dye house dotted the
landscape.
Carpenters worked with potters, smiths, and soap makers to provide for
the needs of the Oeconomy’s residents and business services
to non-Moravians
who passed through Bethlehem or came there to shop. A steady stream of
preachers, missionaries, and letters connected Bethlehem to their
Indian,
English and German neighbors, as well as other Moravian settlements
around
the world. Within Bethlehem and Nazareth, the Moravians lived
dormitory-style,
in choir groups constituted according to age, sex, and marital status.
In most cases, even married people lived separately from each other,
their
children in the nursery or in children’s choirs.
Bethlehm’s leaders dolled
out jobs according to choirs as well—single sisters spun and
washed, single
brothers worked the fields, and married brethren were often employed in
the craft houses. This system freed both men and women from family and
domestic responsibilities so they could travel as preachers and
religious
teachers, while simultaneously staffing as many industries as possible,
to finance the Unity’s projects.
Even during Bethlehem’s early days, some
individuals were uncomfortable
living in choirs rather than in traditional family households. In the
late
1750s, the communal structure came under increasing pressure from both
outside and inside Pennsylvania. The Unity’s rapid and
ambitious expansion
during the preceding decades had brought with it massive debts which
were
felt in all Moravian communities. In addition, the Seven
Years’ War caused
financial hardship in the Pennsylvania backcountry and in Saxony.
Finally,
Zinzendorf’s death in 1760 prompted a re-evaluation of the
church’s economic
organization. Bethlehem’s leaders had never intended the
communal economic
structure to be a permanent aspect of life for the Moravians in North
America.
In 1761, Bethlehem’s leaders set about the complicated
process of shifting
from one single communal household to a more traditional town made up
of
separate families. Not all communal ties were abandoned, however. The
church
continued to own all of the land in Bethlehem and Nazareth, and only
Moravians
were permitted to lease plots and build homes. The church also
maintained
control over several key industries, employing salaried craftsmen who
worked
for the benefit of the international church. The Single Brethren and
Single
Sisters’ choir houses continued to house unmarried or widowed
adults.
Although Bethlehem’s communal period was
a thing of the past by the
time of the American Revolution, the Moravians’ distinctive,
religiously
oriented lifestyle lasted well into the nineteenth century.
Architecturally,
the Oeconomy period left a strong imprint on Bethlehem. The choir
houses
still stand on the hillside over the Monocacy creek today, offering
visual
proof of the town’s communal history. A unique period in
Bethlehem’s history,
the communal economy was never an end unto itself, but rather a means
by
which to support missionary and educational projects. Those projects
lasted
well beyond the end of the communal period, and in them can be seen the
same religious spirit that inspired the Oeconomy.
For further information on Bethlehem’s
communal period, see:
Faull, Katherine M. Moravian Women's Memoirs:
Their Related Lives, 1750-1820.
Syracuse, New York: Syracuse University Press; 1997.
Gollin, Gillian Lindt. Moravians in Two Worlds: A
Study of Changing
Communities. New York: Columbia University Press; 1967.
Smaby, Beverly Prior. The Transformation of
Moravian Bethlehem: From
Communal Mission to Family Economy. Philadelphia: University of
Pennsylvania
Press; 1988.
Thorp, Daniel B. "Chattel with A Soul: The
Autobiography of a Moravian
Slave." Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography. 1988 Jul;
112(3):433-51.
|