← Research LibraryExact extracted unit
Indexed source
THE MENNONITE BROTHERHOOD IN RUSSIA (1789 - 1910), P. M. Friesen, 1911
Available for full-text research. Open the source to inspect original-language passages and page references.
VerificationThe full text is searchable; full source verification is not yet recorded.
Citation checksNo verified references are recorded yet
Research profileNot current yet
Text fragment 118 (not an original page number)
Unit 118 of 984. Only the selected source passage is shown.
nor himself arrived to investigate who the trouble
makers were . . . these gave themselves away with their rude speeches
and answers whereupon they were incarcerated for a time. But this only
kindled the fire even more against Hoeppner. And even though he stood
up for them, they called him ‘the soul-merchant!’ Nevertheless, the
orders of the government had now to be obeyed. . . . The dissatisfaction
and the desire to move away, however, could not be banned from their
hearts. . . . [Numerous colonial directors, one worse than the other,
succeeded one another to the detriment of the colony. Finally, the
delegates themselves gave up their powers and presented their
important papers to the ministers of the church. In the end a malicious
Italian became the director. He attempted to extort money from the
delegates, but without success. All the differences had supposedly been
settled during the stay in the colony of the Prussian ministers Cornelius
Regier and Cornelius War ken tin, and a document of reconciliation had
indeed been drawn up to this effect. But the peace did not prevail, since
new intrigues revolved around the director.]
e) “The actual agreement reached with the director was not made
known; but that it had been decided to take revenge on the delegates
subsequently became clear. . . . The director saw this occasion as an
116
IN RUSSIA 1789-1860
opportunity to even the score with the delegates, since his first attempt
to extort money from them had failed. His minions were soon mobilized.
Since they too had left their first love, the church ministers failed in their
duty to quench the fire. The delegates were separated from the
congregation . . . Bartsch quickly resorted to pleading and, along with
two adulterers, was readmitted. Hoeppner, the other delegate, would not
succumb to such measures; and when he finally did give in, they refused
to readmit him since they had already brought legal proceedings against
him in the imperial court. Since the accusation brought against him,
probably with the help of the director, had been carefully drawn up and
signed, there was no hope of leniency and indeed the full force of the
judgment was handed down to him. Twelve witnesses had to swear that
the accusation was correct, which at first horrified the leaders, but in
order to save their honor they forfeited their souls. Justice and human
love were no longer to be found here: Hoeppner was taken into custody
by the brethren, brought to Ekaterinoslav and put in jail. All his
property was registered and sealed, and a guard was placed at his house.
Be alarmed, dear children, and watch out that you never participate in
such vulgar acts of violence where one runs rough-shod over his
fellow-man. Hardly any disciples of our Lord were to be found amongst us
any more. Nevertheless, we intend to hope and believe that God has
retained some seed unto Himself, otherwise there would have been no
hope for us. The pain
Source excerpts
[THE MENNONITE BROTHERHOOD IN RUSSIA (1789 - 1910), P. M. Friesen, 1911. Книга представляет документальную историю Меннонитской братской общины в России (1789-1910), основанную на архивных материалах, собранных автором за 25 лет. Автор, П. М. Фризен, со] P. M. FRIESEN OTHERHOOD IN RUSSIA ( 1789 - 1910 ) P. M. Friesen THE MENNONITE BROTHERHOOD IN RUSSIA ( 1789 - 1910 ) How do you write the history of a movement when you are still a part of that movement? Whom do you believe when leading participants in those historical events disagree strongly not only on why things happened, but also on what happen- ed? What imparts the ring of truth to a denominational history? For P. M. Friesen the answer was a documentary history, letting the record speak for itself. Gathering historical docu- ments ov…