THE MENNONITE BROTHERHOOD IN RUSSIA (1789 - 1910), P. M. Friesen, 1911

ni- zation he had himself, although originally a Frisian, earlier taken a strong position. Neither the congregation nor the elder raised any objections against his request, since they too acknowledged that the Flemish Church had not dealt with him in love. [The Frisian Church had had no part in the cruel treatment of the delegates in spite of the fact that, according to Hildebrand, more quarrels and disorders erupted in it during the early years than in the Flemish Church.) Therefore they decided to accept him as one who had been disciplined by the church. 39 For many years he lived, together with his wife and children, at peace in this congregation on his own property [on the island Chortitza] with his son Jakob Hoeppner 40 until he died. . . . Earlier he had made his children promise, in lieu of an oath, to bury him and his wife on his own property. This they did. . . . g) [Concerning the guilt or innocence of the delegates, Hildebrand reports the following on page 91): “I believe beyond a shadow of a doubt that this [the assertion that the delegates had embezzled funds) was an unjustified accusation. For the government had paid the monies out to each individual with extreme care, always being careful that the receipts matched the monies paid out. But no rational person will deny that the delegates had now and then dealt harshly with the people, nor will he deny that it was difficult to deal in love and patience with people who 118 IN RUSSIA 1789-1860 were as agitated as these were. Certainly the delegates did make real mistakes which, although settled later, were never really forgotten by their opponents. In this regard the ministers of the church were guilty of the sin of neglect: they neglected, namely, to impress the fact upon the members that wrongs which have been righted may not constantly be referred to in a censorious manner. . . .” [Thus far according to Hildebrand.] h) In his Die Chortitza Mennoniten, the Reverend D. H. Epp 41 has the following to say about Hoeppner: “Hoeppner, for the role he played during the first immigration and the founding of the colony, deserves greater recognition from his brethren, from us, than many have been willing to concede him. . . [At its centennial celebration the colony erected a memorial on Hoeppner’s grave.] i) In his little booklet, mentioned above, Hildebrand also recounts many sad episodes in the moral life of the young colony. In one village the Mennonite settlers built themselves a tavern where they, in a drunken stupor, committed a murder. All of this tends to disillusion the reader, especially when he has read all the favorable things written in the books by men of other faiths, or recalls Menno Simon’s “Withdrawal from the Catholic Church” and the chapter on the martyrs. But things could hardly have been different where, for a long time, the children had been admitted to the church solely upon a catechetical faith, and where unworthy