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 246 (not an original page number)

Unit 246 of 984. Only the selected source passage is shown.
Exact extracted unit
ob Reimer (Gnadenfeld), Elder Lenzmann’s presentation of the proposal in favor of "deportation” in Gnadenfeld was more negative than positive and Abraham Matthies of Rudnerweide spoke against it in an especially vociferous manner. The Kleine Oemeinde, as always, remained neutral but friendly. According to the Minister Jakob Martens of Tiegenhagen and Privy Councillor Klaus, this was the last desperate attempt on the part of the agitated Mennonite local civil authorities to paralyze the effectiveness of Claassen’s petition to His Majesty. d) According to Brother Heinrich Epp’s “Report,” which is given below under XIX ff., the same procedure was used in the District of Chortitza, resulting in the same favorable outcome for the Brethren. e) One year after the paper of November 12, 1862, had been drawn up, Johann Harder wrote to Heinrich Huebert (the original is extant: the text is written in the hand of the Minister Franz Isaak, but the signature Difficulties and Victory 255 is in Harder’s own hand; with it is a copy of the November 12, 1862, document also in Harder's own hand): “To the Church Minister 55 Heinrich Huebert of Liebenau: As far as the order given in the circular you mentioned in your letter of the 23rd of this month is concerned, I know that the Area Administrative Office has issued such an order on the 7th of this month under No. 12652 ; but whether this circular is based upon something the elders ascertained or whether the Area Administrative Office issued it only on its own authority, is entirely unknown to me,— and since you wish to know whether or not the Ohrloff-Halbstadt congregation is in agreement with this order 56 of the Area Administrative Office, the fact that this congregation recognizes you as a congregation of equal standing and rights with all the other Mennonite congregations, to which effect I informed the Area Administrative Office on behalf of my congregation on November 12, 1862, is proof of a negative response. Blumstein, December 24, 1863. Johann Harder, church elder.” f) The Molotschna Council of Church Leaders, naturally without the consent of the Ohrloff Elder Johann Harder and Elder Friesen of the Kleine Gemeinde, in 1864 once more, in a ceremonious and interesting maimer, formulated the reason why they were unable to recognize the brethren as a congregation in the following way: “To the Most Honorable Area Administrative Office in Halbstadt: Although we, the undersigned church elders, some time ago orally declared to the honorable Area Administrative Office the reasons why we cannot recognize those members, who have left our congregations, as a Mennonite church, or hold their ecclesiastical acts to be legal and binding, we nevertheless deem it appropriate in this case to deliver our earlier declaration in writing to the Area Administrative Office, and that as follows: First: Our God is not a God of disorder, but of peace, as in all congregations of

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…