← 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 366 (not an original page number)
Unit 366 of 984. Only the selected source passage is shown.
their promise, and the rest
declared that, ‘they had promised nothing; one had to obey God rather
than man; they could not act against their conscience, come what may.’
o) All counterpresentations once again accomplished nothing, and
consequently nothing else remained but for the brotherhood assemblies
to decide what course of action the churches were to take. In the
380
THE MENNONITE BRETHREN CHURCH
Gnadenfeld congregation the decision was reached ‘to excommunicate
the seceded members from the church but without the ban,' that is, the
civic association between them and the church members could continue.
In the other churches the seceded members were punished with the full
ban according to II Thessalonians 3. p) Those thus set apart ignored the
punishment and gave no indication that they would reform. On the
contrary, from that time on they conducted holy co mmuni on, sometimes
in the presence of their elected ministers and sometimes without them.
As a premliminary to the Lord’s Supper they introduced mutual
footwashing which to them means that the male sex washes the feet of
the female sex and the latter those of the male sex. 163 Soon they also
began to baptize each other by total immersion because in their opinion
only that form is scriptural and valid. In their worship services
disorderly and arbitrary things went on in that at random persons of any
age and sex loudly voiced their opinions and prayed while others
applauded with loud exclamations of ‘Victoria! Gloria! Halleluja!’ or
voiced their approval of these things with hand-clapping, jumping, and
loud laughing. All Christian devotional literature, books of sermons,
Besser’s Bibelwerk, Arndt’s Wahres Christentum and the Paradiesgaert-
lein, Stark’s Gebetbuch, and the like, were despised and rejected by
them; writings which they disliked particularly were even burnt. Only
the Friedensglocke , whose argumentation in 1860 had been in agreement
with their own desires and thoughts about the relationship of believers to
the church, and the Missionsblaetter getaufter Christen [Baptists], were
and remained cherished periodicals in their midst. At times they made so
much unnatural noise in their gatherings by shrieking (rejoicing),
singing, music, dancing, and jumping, that neighbors and passers-by ran
to see if human lives were in danger in the house. The most repulsive
aspect of all this is that such wild, crude activities, not infrequently
carried on through half or all of the night, during which the ‘holy kiss,’
as token of sacred brotherly and sisterly love, plays a major role, are
considered by them the work of the Holy Spirit, q) Not satisfied with
merely drawing new members from the Mennonite colonies to their
fanaticism, a fanaticism that caters to the carnal, evil heart, they sent
two youths who excelled in intellectual narrow-mindedness, conceit, and
impudence, as apostles to the Lutheran churches in the Volga area in
1860. There these
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…