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

contrast to Abraham Unger and his followers who might be designated as “Baptist-predestinarian.” 326 By this we naturally do not mean that the latter wanted to wipe out Mennonitism systematically and that the former wanted to deny salvation to the Baptists. We know, indeed, that Oncken described Unger and his colleagues as adherents to Menno’s distinctives, and that Aron Lepp proposed Liebig’s second call and accepted the ordination by Oncken as teacher and co-elder; but we also know to what extent Unger was attracted to everything Hamburg had and practiced (although he never sacrificed any point of Mennonite teaching— cf. Oncken's letters of his 532 THE MENNONITE BRETHREN CHURCH journeys, 1869— but he almost completely gave up the Mennonite flavor), and how close Lepp was associated with Leppke the “super- Mennonite.” Furthermore, the anonymous brother distinguishes once again a group of those above mentioned as striving for and preaching sanctification, systematically and with purpose, another group more fervently preaching only conversion, baptism, and the cultivation of church life (naturally without denying the wish for and the duty of sanctification). The attitude towards the Baptists has remained formal and official as it was left at the annual meeting of 1876. (Cf. above # 209-11 and 221 and the concluding remarks of the Confession of Faith 1873/76). But a great cooling off and occasional hardheartedness and rejection occurred in the period of time under consideration both in the Einlage as well as in other M.B. congregations. The “alliance” or “open communion” movement, to be discussed in more detail at a later point, made these “Baptist-shy” brethren in as far as they were probably all of strong Anabaptist persuasion, consequentially and perhaps unconsciously more friendly to the Baptists. To a large extent the distance between Mennonite Brethren and their Baptist brethren was also due to the efforts of some from the Mennonite Church and other Mennonite groups who continually tried to force the Mennonite Brethren to become Baptists in the eyes of the law. (Compare #214). The strange thing about this is that the “Mennonite-pietist” stream did not evoke an affinity with the genuine believers of the Mennonite Church. This stream of Mennonite Brethren was cool towards both the Baptists and the Mennonites. Elder Lepp, moreover, has more than once expressed the view that communion fellowship with the Baptists would only be natural, 327 in spite of some important differences in doctrine (and small differences in church practice) and in consistent manner communion fellowship with all believers of the Mennonite Church with whom the Mennonite Brethren had complete unity in doctrine (in spite of greater differences in church practice). And in this the honorable brother, according to the author’s conviction of forty years, is completely correct. (In fact, however, Lepp has not been able to contrib