← 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 530 (not an original page number)
Unit 530 of 984. Only the selected source passage is shown.
favored liberal-minded administrators who were tolerant in national and
religious matters. New people took charge. Obsequious or ignorant
officials (or both) presented the matter regarding the church buildings to
the authorities in an attempt to put things “in the proper light.’’ The
Orthodox Consistory was approached, via the Archbishop of Kherson
and Odessa. This took place at a time when a law which had been
disregarded for a hundred years was being re-activated. It was a law
having to do with applications for religious buildings submitted by
Muslims, Jews, Protestants, and Catholics. What happened now
was perhaps the grossest and most insulting chicanery which we
Mennonites experienced in the nationalistic and reactionary period. (We
do not want to call it persecution, because our Christianity had not
reached a level where God would have honored us with that.) The local
Orthodox provost (“Blagotschinny”), directed by the lesser leaders of
the consistory, reported in documents that had been pushed under his
pen for signature (though he was sincerely ashamed of them) that there
would be grave danger for the Russian inhabitants of the village of
Sagradovka (twelve versts distant) because they could be tempted by
the “Stundism” if the Mennonites should conduct their (German!!)
worship services in these church buildings. The Archbishop conveyed
this concern to the governor, and several weeks prior to Pentecost in
1896, the police locked up both churches! Two church buildings for
seventeen solidly Mennonite villages in a volost originally founded by
Mennonites, consisting of 5,000 inhabitants whose religious rights had
been clear and inviolable for a hundred years! And this because they had
believed the verbal promise and advice of a provincial chief who had
almost unlimited authority— a promise given as an official action and in
the presence of his staff! The worship services of both chinches now were
held simultaneously in various village school buildings, changing from
one location to another. This freedom, which the Mennonites had always
exercised, was also taken from them but was soon restored by action of
the Ministry of the Interior. And now something no less lamentable
The M.B. Church 1885-1910
549
occurred. Beginning with the first step in this matter, and long
thereafter, according to the advice and direction of the former area
administrator, Reimer, and the secretary, Fast, as well as the former
Bergen, who was then the area administrator, the two church groups had
made their presentations to the authorities as two Mennonite Church
bodies, without indicating any difference between them. The leaders of
both had signed the official documents together. The same practice was
followed when, at the request of the M.B. Church of Sagradovka, P. M.
Friesen came from Odessa in the s umm er of 1895 and found equally
warm acceptance in both churches. The leadership of both churches
immediately place
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…