Avakum
Checking archive
← Research Library
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.

2,951 passagesText fragments 1–984; these are not original page numberslanguage not recorded
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 222 (not an original page number)

Unit 222 of 984. Only the selected source passage is shown.
Exact extracted unit
bmit themselves to everything that was not against God’s Word and their conscience.” Thus far Reimer. On the nineteenth and twenty-seventh of December, brotherhood meetings took place in Gnadenfeld where the ministers and the brethren in agreement with Claassen and Reimer, both of whom had not been present at that co mmunio n service, pronounced themselves satisfied with the promises made by the six members. Others, however, were not satisfied with this and loosed "a barrage [Reimer’s words] against Claassen and me, screaming: ‘Out with them, they are no better than the rest’ [the six]. The screamers threatened to ‘turn Reimer over to the Area Administra- tive Office together with all those who agreed with this shameful act.’ Reimer quietly made his way forward to the elder and asked him to allow them to leave, for he was not willing to allow himself to become involved with the church brethren, and especially Heinrich Franz, in this way. Reimer’s and Claassen’s opponents shouted to Lenzmann: ‘Why do you not allow them to leave?’ until he said in a sorrowful tone: ‘Well, then, brothers, leave!’ But when it appeared as though only Claassen and I would go out, Franz called out to Br. Claassen: ‘As a rule you are such an honest [?] man, so call on your cohorts to come with you!’ Thereupon Claassen turned around and said: ‘Well, brothers!’— whoever shared his views should follow him. About ten brothers left the church.” (According to Reimer.) c) Although the Gnadenfeld congregation lost only about twenty- five members as a result of this "departure,” it nevertheless also led to the separation of those who gathered themselves around them as guests and little by little joined them more formally, as Claassen, Nicholas Schmidt, Abram Matthies and others had done at an earlier date. Gnadenfeld had ceased to be the center of the Brotherhood Movement. Three years later a considerably larger number of those, at this moment 230 THE MENNONITE BRETHREN CHURCH (1859/60) still regarded as belonging to the Mennonite Church but later called the “Friends of Jerusalem” (to which group even the worthy Minister Nikolai Schmidt joined himself), left Gnadenfeld, as they had earlier left the Brotherhood Movement, and established the “Temple Church” under the direction of Hoffmann and amidst circumstances that shook and weakened the Gnadenfeld congregation much more than the incident related above. XIV. THE FOUNDING OF THE INDEPENDENT M.B. CHURCH OF 1860 1. As a result of the “Secession or Founding Document” of January 6, 1860, which Claassen and a few Gnadenfeld members, together with members of other congregations, had signed,— eighteen heads of f amili es in all,— and to which Reimer and eight other Gnadenfeld members (men) agreed on January 18, the essential establishment of an independent M.B. Church had taken place. 26 Attempts, on the part of Lenzmann and the other Gnadenfeld ministers, toward reunion were, a

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…