← 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 246 (not an original page number)
Unit 246 of 984. Only the selected source passage is shown.
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…