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

help of the higher civil power which did whatever Cornies considered acceptable. Thus the Council of Church Leaders was obliged to exercise undue authority. After Cornies died, the matter tended in the same direction for some time, until Ohrloff, remaining alone, rejected all "subordination” (which it had itself previously demanded: cf #50) and, thanks to its many intelligent forces and to the confidence which Philip Wiebe enjoyed in high places (cf. #108, Ohrloff’s recognition of the M.B. Church) was able to carry the matter to its conclusion (#52(2)). The M.B. Church was able to do the same. The “Templers,” according to the sources in Franz Isaak’s Molotschna Mennoniten, helped not a little in guiding the assembly of churches back to their original— their proper and most valuable— role as an authoritative, fatherly-brotherly, advisory assembly, particularly in respect to authoritative representa- tion. §160(3) 5(3). Note. In order to correct, that is justify and amplify what we have said earlier, in #52, point g, about the brethren Lange, we quote A. Klaus, loc. tit., pages 291 and 301. “. . . When . . .their special school . . . soon . . . gained the confidence of people generally, resent- ment against them reached its height. The Council of Church Leaders and the Administrative Office maintained that the ultimate objective of the sect of the ‘Friends of Jerusalem,’ with its center in Wuerttemberg, was not only to transform all existing Christian churches but also to change their entire social life so that the adherents of this doctrine would consequently adopt a posture of antagonism toward the instituted authorities. They asserted that the Lange brothers taught the same things in the schools founded by them. They demanded the utter expulsion of the Lange brothers, if not from Russia, then at leaset from the midst of the Mennonite colonies, since the further stay of these persons could only endanger the peace of the colonies. All such accusations were not substantiated by actual proof .... Finally, the explanations offered by the Langes themselves, and their written defence of the doctrines of their teachings, placed beyond doubt that the electoral body of the Mennonites, in this case as well, was moved mainly by motives of religious intolerance and by the spirit of partisanship . . . [Page 301] .... In view of the prevailing agitation of Documentary Supplements 359 passions, the Lange brothers preferred to avoid further quarrels and persecution” [and moved to the Caucasus] .... Compare also Franz Isaak, loc. cit., page 260: ‘‘[In the Ministry Office the Lange brothers] were confronted with various complaints submitted by the Commission, by Lenzmann, and by the president of the Agricultural Society, Peter Schmidt . . . [cf. page 255] . . . The entire secular and religious administration stood in opposition to the Lange brothers . . . [page 256] . . . They were permitted to settle in the C