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 508 (not an original page number)

Unit 508 of 984. Only the selected source passage is shown.
Exact extracted unit
ongregations agreed with this decision.” The question whether ministers be permitted to solemnize marriages of unbaptized persons was again raised especially by the younger congregations not f amiliar with the experiences of their elders. All questions regarding this problem have, however, been answered by the conferences, and this in the spirit of the resolutions agreed upon at one time in the congregation at Einlage (#137, 212). 7. The Molotschna congregation, too, experienced difficulties from §241(2) the police authorities similar to those of the Einlage congregation discussed in #214. “In the year 1885 one Sunday just at the time when baptismal candidates were being examined, the police entered the meeting house at Rueckenau and requested vehemently that we prove whether our congregation and our meeting house had been confirmed by the authorities. He was told that we Mennonites have the right to practice our doctrine according to our confession of faith and according to our tradition. Nevertheless, the confirmation of our meeting house had not yet been granted in spite of repeated applications.” At the provincial government of Taurida the question arose as to who was responsible for the confirmation of the Mennonite churches since the imperial law relating to the Mennonites did not make provision for such a confirmation formerly taken care of by the Supervisory Commission. Subsequently the congregation requested of the Supervisory Commission that the meeting house at Rueckenau be sanctioned on the basis of the general regulations regarding public church buildings, something that has been done with all Mennonite meeting houses since this time, probably as a result of an inquiry by provincial authorities at the central board of 526 THE MENNONITE BRETHREN CHURCH colonization. With regard to the Mennonite church question, the following should be noted as important: the law nowhere specifies that the Mennonites “must” have public meeting houses, but that they “may” build such on their land (Article 121, Part II, Volume XII). As long as Mennonites have been in Russia, public worship services have been held in private homes, as in the Chortitza settlements from 1789 onward. At least nine-tenths of the marriage ceremonies and funeral services are held in homes. This is part of the Mennonite “Church Regulations and Traditions” guaranteed in Article 1104, 318 Part I, Volume XI published in 1896. 319 In the meantime this new official unfamiliar with our situation, had informed the governor of Taurida, that here in Rueckenau a Baptist congregation had been formed without sanction or permission of the proper authorities. Thereupon the provincial authorities demanded that within a month request be made for the approval of the elder, the minister, and the Rueckenau meeting house. As a consequence, on January 23rd, 1886, through the brethren D. Schellenberg and P.M. Friesen, the explanation to the Ministr

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…