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

eligious differences of opinion between the M.B. Church and other Mennonites have no significance.” (Cf. Glaubensbekenntnis, 1900-1902, German and Russian legal postscript, page 56.) This question has been brought to the attention of the highest civil authorities in connection with the German Baptists, who enjoy the same ecclesiastical rights as the Mennonites and other Protestants. The Ministry of the Interior, Department for Spiritual Matters, answered, 1889 December 12, sub No. 1917, that “this question could be decided only by the clergymen performing the marriage ceremony, in this case by the Baptist ministers” whose competence in marriage questions involving their own members is based on the same legal articles of the document cited earlier as those which grant final authority in marriage matters to Lutherans, Reformed and the Evangelical Lutheran General Consistory. Consequently, the highest authority of the Empire renounces all governmental interference in marriage matters among Mennonites and other Protestants, insofar as they do not involve criminal or civil issues. Likewise, the Russian State Baptism by Immersion 305 recognizes marriages among the Molokans and those who practice no baptism, and permits marriages between Protestants and (non-baptized) Jews and Mohammedans (Vol. XI, Part 1. Article 328, of the entire collection, 1896 edition). The Mennonite spiritual leaders therefore have to decide the matter entirely on the basis of the Scriptures and their conscience, together with the church, without any dependence on civil law or authorities; on them alone rests the responsibility in regard to this non-evangelical procedure. (Compare further under #212.) 10. Audiatur et altera pars — One should also hear the other sidel a) Remaining true to this principle even in this matter is made possible through a letter— received immediately prior to the printing of this chapter on baptism— from our venerable minister and elder, Isaak Peters of America, a vehement opponent of baptism by immersion, and, as already stated (see above #19), one of our foremost authorities on old- Mennonite literature, and, as far as we are concerned, without a doubt a believer and an honest man. May his excessive zeal, as we understand it, confront the equally excessive zeal of the strict immersionists. In my opinion, Dirk Philips would have written in the same vein as Bishop Peters. Menno, we think, would, with considered calmness, have called the zealots of both camps to exercise moderation. b) Father Peters writes: “Which is the evangelical pattern and form of Christian water baptism? 1. “The Apostle Paul teaches in Ephesians 4:5-6: ‘One Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of us all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.’ There is only one baptism in the true sense of the word, without which no one is fit for God’s kingdom; but this is not water baptism. John the Baptist testifie