Hans Heinrich Reiff

  Noted events in his life were:

• faith, 1670. ⁶⁹¹ I became an Anabaptists in 1670 and was persecuted for my beliefs

• lived, Between 1634 and 1640. We lived in Wadenswill, Zurich, Switzerland between the census's that were taken in 1634 and 1640.

• lived: Ibersheim, Rheinland-Pfalz, Germany, Between 1673 and 1680. My family was listed in the 1673 and 1680 census as living in Ibersheim, Rheinland-Pfalz, Germany.

• census, 1685, Ibersheim, Rheinland-Pfalz, Germany. In 1685, I was listed in a census as living in Ibersheim, Germany.

• census, 1689. The last census that I was registered in took place in 1689.

• Notes of Interest. ⁶⁹² Zurich, a canton in northern Switzerland, was the birthplace of the Anabaptists movement. Zurich has been listed first in the official list of cantons of the Swiss Confederacy in 1531. The city has been the largest city and most important economic center in Switzerland through most of its history. The city ruled the territory of the canton until 1803, when a democratic republic was established representing the entire cantonal population. The Swiss Reformation began in Zurich with the work of Ulrich Zwingli who came to the city as the head pastor in 1519 and led the movement until his death at the Battle of Cappel in 1531. Heinrich Bullinger became the leader of the Zurich church from 1531-1575 upon Zwingli's death. From 1523 to 1798 the church of the canton of Ziirich was a pure state church with a Reformed theology. The Catholic forms of worship were reformed in May 1525. Since then it is a modified state church.

The Anabaptists movement arose out of the circle of intimate friends and followers of Zwingli in Zurich, who, after failure to persuade Zwingli to establish a free church of believers only, introduced adult baptism on confession of faith on Jan. 21, 1525, in a meeting of some 15 men in the house of Felix Manz's mother on Neustadt Street. The leaders were two young citizens of Zurich, Conrad Grebe and Felix Mainz together with Georg Blaurock a former priest of Chur. Grebel and Manz were both sons of prominent Zurich patrician families, both gifted university students, counted by Zwingli among his most devoted and promising followers. The break with Zwingli occurred after the second Zurich religious disputation in October 1523 and came gradually during the ensuing year as the state church policy of Zwingli became clear.

In order to suppress the Anabaptist movement Zurich instituted the death penalty for teaching or preaching Anabaptism. This prevented the development of an organized Anabaptists congregation in Zurich. The first congregation in the neighborhood was in the adjacent village of Zollikon, which existed from February to May 1525, and then was suppressed.

The first center of the movement was apparently in the territory of Gruningen, the southeastern part of the canton, where Grebel, Manz, and Blaurock found a good response among the villagers in the summer and fall of 1525. By 1528, however, the promising growth had been broken here. Later the stronger areas were west of Zurich in the Horgerberg, Wadenswil, and Knonau districts.

The threat of the Anabaptists movement led to important measures of discipline in the Zurich state church whose purpose was to aid in detecting individual Anabaptists and making their key activities illegal. Among these was the introduction of the compulsory baptismal register on May 24, 1526, compulsory marriage in the church buildings (the Anabaptists married in their own conventicles), and in 1529 compulsory attendance at the state church service.. All these measures were combined and intensified in the sharp and comprehensive mandate of March 26, 1530 which included a direct attack against the Anabaptists tolerating this “vicious sect,” but also designed to meet the threat of a movement which rejected the oath and all military service. The Anabaptists denied under cross-questioning that they “preached against the state,” and there is no direct evidence that they were charged at this time with reducing the military potential of the state in its struggle with the Catholic cantons.

One of the consequences of the persecution of the Anabaptists in Zurich as well as in other Swiss cantons was emigration to Moravia, where, except for two brief periods of persecution in 1536 and 1548, toleration by the authorities, as well as a vigorous church life, proved a great attraction. Missionaries from the Hutterite colonies there frequently came to Switzerland to solicit immigrants, with considerable success, as the Hutterite Chronik repeatedly reports. In 1585, for instance, the Chronik says, “So many people came from Switzerland that at several places the doors had to be closed to them because not all could be received, though a good part of them were taken in.” The years 1584-88 were a period of unusual emigration. On Aug. 18, 1584, at an eastern Zurich border point, a party of 50 headed for Moravia was apprehended. Not all the emigrants joined the Hutterite colonies, for there were congregations of Swiss Brethren in Moravia until well into the 17th century. Several times Hutterite emissaries were caught in Zurich. In 1574 three were arrested, questioned, and expelled. In 1584, “seven preachers” were sent to Switzerland, according to the Chronik. There is evidence also that at least a few similar emissaries came from the Netherlands and took some Swiss Brethren back with them. In 1575, the Zurich archives report an Anabaptists preacher from the Netherlands preaching at various meetings near Billach, “who had been there before.” In 1584 there is specific mention of emigration to the Netherlands. In the mid-17th century there was also a strong emigration to Alsace and the Palatinate.

The Zurich authorities wavered in their attitudes toward the Anabaptists emigration. At times they encouraged it and even expelled members of the group. At other times, as in 1576 they forbade it. In all cases they forbade re-entry except to those who recanted and returned to the Protestant Church. It is worthy of note that the opposition to the Anabaptists by the state in one of the mandates was based almost exclusively on social and economic grounds, such as their rejection of the oath, but especially their emigration with its consequent loss of wealth and manpower to the state and the weakening of the national defense through reduction of soldier material.

An interesting aspect of the relation of Anabaptists to the state church is the recognition by the authorities that the poor behavior of the Zurich clergy, both in morals and in performance of their preaching and pastoral duties, was one cause of the growth of Anabaptism. Repeatedly the failures of the parish clergy in the villages were castigated and measures taken for reform. On Aug. 4, 1585, for instance, the city council sent a message to the Zurich church synod, which was to be read twice yearly at the synod meetings, calling for vigorous reform and improvement of the clergy, since the lack of discipline and poor sense of responsibility of the clergy was the cause for the separation of “many pious, God-fearing people.” Their failures, especially moral failures, were to be punished with imprisonment, suspension, or discharge. The conference of the four cantons on July 4, 1585, which had been called primarily to agree upon common measures against the Anabaptists, also decided on a long series of measures calling for a reform of the clergy as well as of the morals of the population in general.

The measures against the Anabaptists were most often of an economic nature. In addition to money fines, withdrawal of permission to participate in the economic life of the village or community was ordered, including denial of acceptance into a village upon attempted transfer from one location to another. Money fines were imposed freely. For instance, the first absence from the state church Sunday preaching service drew a fine of 20 batzen, the second 5 pounds, and further absences up to 20 pounds. Attendance at Anabaptists services was fined one pound. Hospitality to an Anabaptists cost 10 pounds. An anonymous communication to the city council in 1560 with the title, “By what means Anabaptists may be resisted, and how the Anabaptists, especially their leaders, may be punished,” advocated as the chief measure the imposition of money fines.

The continued repressive measures against the Anabaptists did not succeed in rooting them out of Zurich until after the middle of the 17th century. Neither imprisonment confiscation, nor emigration brought about surrender. Evidently the various measures authorized were not always thoroughly and relentlessly applied, even though the clergy were intense in their opposition to the Anabaptists. It is true that no specific congregations can be identified and very few elders and ministers can be named throughout the entire 140-year history of Zurich Anabaptism and no evidence has emerged of any general meeting or conferences of the entire body in the canton, nor have any records of the group itself survived except petitions or confessions submitted to the authorities. One of the latter is the “Gruningen Petition” of 1528 submitted by Jakob Falk and Heini Reimann, at that time in prison. Another is the petition of April 23, 1589, submitted by Andreas Gut of Affoltern on behalf of the brotherhood. A third petition, of 1589, possibly also drafted by Andreas Gut, entitled “Supplication an den Burgermeister und Rat der Stadt Zurich von einigen Wiedertaufem,” with the further title “Einfaltig bekanntnus,” treats five main points: the causes for the great division, the value of the Old Testament in comparison to the New, the relation of the fellowship of believers of the New Testament to those of the Old, the attitude toward the state and the holding of public offices, and baptism. The Zurich clergy replied to the “Bekanntnus” with a polernic document of its own, containing ten points of polernic description of the harmful influence of the Anabaptists upon the people, and pointing out their “opposition to the state,” including no swearing of oaths and rejection of military service.

The Anabaptists movement in Zurich experienced a moderate revival in members after 1600. Contributing to this was the serious estrangement between the general peasant population of the villages and the city population and government, which created a great deal of unrest, together with the continuing poor performance of the clergy. The sympathy of the people for the Anabaptists was so strong in some places, such as Groningen, that it was practically impossible for the police to arrest them or to impose penalties. The magistrate of Wadenswil reported on October 8, 1612, “that they have such a strong following that no one wants to lay hands on them. Other reports indicate that the Anabaptists were well enough organized to have a charity fund for the aid of the poor, administered by a “treasurer. The Anabaptist received legacies and gifts and even owned a small farm near Sihlbrugg (Hallauergutli):

In January 1613, a new mandate was issued against the Anabaptists, which was largely a repetition of that of 1585. On the basis of this mandate attempts were first made to win over the Anabaptists peacefully through disputations or conversations. At the first disputation, which took place at Wadenswil on January 26, the Zurich Burgermeister Rahn, aided by J. J. Breitinger, pastor at St. Peter's in Zurich represented Zurich, while the elders Hans Landis and Rudolph Bachmann and a preacher Galatz represented the Anabaptist. The meeting was fruitless. At the second disputation held at Griiningen on March 3, 1613, sixteen of the forty Anabaptists living in the area appeared, while Stadholder Keller, Vogt Grebel, and J. J. Breifinger represented Zurich. Again the meeting was fruitless. Accordingly the authorities now attempted to carry through the mandate, which was made more difficult by a decree of the council forbidding emigration. At last extreme measures were taken. Six Anabaptists leaders from Wadenswil and Horgen were arrested, among them Hans Landis who finally was executed the following year as the last Anabaptists martyr in Zurich. The Ausbund contains a hymn of 47 verses about him. Two of the remaining five emigrated, while three recanted. The first three had been sentenced to the French galleys but escaped at Solothurn before delivery to the French ambassador.

From 1613 on, J. J. Breitinger, serving as leader of the Zurich church and seeking in every respect to promote her highest welfare, prosperity, and unity, took the lead in measures against the Anabaptists. His chief concern in dealing with the Anabaptists was to maintain unity and prevent any significant loss of members or a schism. He was more moderate than some others in the actual measures undertaken, nevertheless carried through strongly. As a wise statesman he saw that the best way to meet the Anabaptists menace was to undermine the movement by removing some of its supposed causes, hence worked vigorously at a reform of the clergy, improvement of the school system, and better care for the poor. Strong measures, including heavy imprisonment up to lifelong terms, wereprovided for leaders and for stubborn impenitent members. These measures succeeded in repressing the movement somewhat and certainly prevented its further growth, but did not completely eradicate it.

After a period of relative quiet the final struggle with the Anabaptists took place in 1633. It was inaugurated with a census of the entire population, which produced a report of a total of 182 adult (over 20 years of age) Anabaptists, distributed as follows- Affoltern 5, Barentswil 11, Birmensdorf 11, Bonstetten 2, Cappel 3, Egg 1, Ellikon 8, Griiningen 2, Gryffensee 1, Hinwyl 7, Hirzel 46, Hausen 3, Maschwanden.5, Wanedorf 11, Mettrnenstetten 6, Ottenbach 3, Pfiffikon 3, Richterswil 12, Stallikon 12, Fischent2l 8, Wald 4, Wadenswil 8, Wetzikon 2, Wildberg 2, suspects 5. The true numbers were certainly higher than the 182 listed. It was further reported that some figures probably represent households, that three of the parishes reported a total of 117 children under 20, and that another had 50 Anabaptists in addition to many suspects. It is interesting to note that the parishes of Birmensdorf and Barentswil reported their Anabaptists to be very wealthy.

On December 28, 1635, four unnamed Anabaptists preachers were arrested and questioned. On August 17, 1635, another disputation was arranged in Knonau, to which all the Anabaptists in the districts of Gruningen, Wadenswil, and Knonau were invited. Later two disputations were held in the city, on Aug. 22 and Sept. 8, 1635. All discussions were fruitless; so the authorities concluded to try another tack. The individual Anabaptists were asked to reply in writing whether they were ready to recant or to emigrate. Four writings were received in Zurich, all negative. The number of Anabaptists in the canton in 1635 must have reached 300 or more. The next step was to arrest most of the Anabaptists and place them in various prisons since the Zurich city prison did not have room. In a short time, all were either released or had escaped. In 1637, a large number were arrested. From these prisoners a petition for leave to emigrate was received, which listed a total of 70 men, 100 women and 300 children as prisoners. This step was taken with heavy heart after 20 weeks of imprisonment; but permission was refused. After several months of very severe imprisonment, the miserable prisoners escaped in March. Therefore, in the following weeks the police were sent on house searches to arrest the Anabaptists again and to confiscate their cash and valuable household goods.

The Anabaptists Commission which was charged with Anabaptists matters, prepared a detailed account of their dealings with the Anabaptists, entitled Handlung und Ersprachurig mit den Widertoeffern ihrer Irrtums wegen, which was published as a '”Manifest” on Oct. 31, 1639, and distributed among the population of the countryside. The Anabaptists replied with an “Antimanifest”

In November and December 1639 the final heavy blow was struck. An order went out from the Anabaptists Commission to arrest all Anabaptists confiscating all their goods, to declare all marriages annulled and all children illegitimate. The Anabaptists were crowded into the prisons, which had been emptied of criminals, and kept in complete isolation under the harshest conditions. All pleas for mercy were denied. The general population was deeply aroused by these measures. Attempts to sell the Anabaptists properties found few buyers and no one was ready to take over their shops or businesses.

On April 23, 1641, the captives escaped from prison, though many were recaptured. Gradually matters quieted down again and once more the Brethren thought that perhaps an implicit toleration might be their lot. The Zurich Anabaptists emigrated, along with numerous Reformed families after the close of the Thirty Years' War in 1648 when immigrants were desired to repopulate southern Germany. They settled largely in the Palatinate. The official records show that a total of 119 Anabaptists left for the Palatinate and Alsace in 1656-1657, while some 1,076 reformed followed the same route. There were 49 Anabaptist with 70 children among the 4,130 that emigrated in 1657.

Hans married Anna Hitz, daughter of Hans Jorg Hitz and Elsbeth Oberholtzer, on 9 Mar 1651 in Wadenswil, Switzerland.⁶⁹⁰ (Anna Hitz was born on 30 Mar 1617 in Wadenswil, Zurich, Switzerland ¹⁷⁵ and died about 1690 in Germany ⁶⁹³.)

  Marriage Notes:

Married 9 March 1652 in Wädenswil, Zurich, SWITZERLAND. Resided with son, Michael, at home of Joseph REIFF 1654 in Zweierhof, Wädenswil, SWITZERLAND. Resided with 4 children, Joseph REIFF and wife, Anna HIESTAND 1670 in Wädenswil, Zurich, SWITZERLAND.