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 55 (not an original page number)

Unit 55 of 984. Only the selected source passage is shown.
Exact extracted unit
iswitz and Wadzeck, one cannot determine with any accuracy when the first Anabaptists arrived in Prussia. The members of the Prussian congregations, for the most part simple country folk, did not write much. Everything that was known about these things in 1820 had been orally passed on from one generation to another. b) According to the Prussian historian Hartknoch the first Ana- baptists came to Prussia from Silesia. He names Eccelius and Tankerus (according to others Fabian Takelius) as their teachers. These appear to have been Bohemian-Moravian quietists, that is nonresistant Hussite brethren (of Slavic origin). Reiswitz and Wadzeck marvel at the fact that these could be called Anabaptists. It had been deliberately forgotten that these Bohemian-Moravian brethren had practiced believer’s baptism from 1467 to about 1636, as had a portion of the Waldensians, with which the pacifistic Hussites, when they organized themselves as the Unitas Fratrum (brotherhood) in 1467, had come into intimate contact because they had requested ordination 18 of their bishops at the hands of the Waldensian bishops. Like the Waldensians, they too refused the oath and military service; they also practiced footwashing. With regard to their dogma, however, they seem, like the Waldensians, never to have fully clarified all the issues or severed themselves completely from Roman Catholic ideas until the Reformation. 19 But a life in imitation of Christ (and as a consequence a strict church discipline) was for both the chief dogma. It was the Lutheran and Calvinist reform movements which aided them in clarifying their dogmatic beliefs, whereas for the Anabaptist movement Menno Simons was most important. Unfortunate- ly, precisely at the time when Menno was rebaptized, the Bohemian Brethren gave up believer’s baptism in order to win the friendship and protection of the Saxon reformers, and instituted confirmation or “the renewing of the baptismal vow” in its place (ca. 1535); nevertheless as late as 1560-70 the Lutheran historian Flacius complained that this act of confirmation “lacked only the water in order to become a rebaptism.” 20 These concessions, however, have not prevented them from being tragically destroyed, whereas the Mennonite Anabaptists have, in spite of the most severe persecutions, never had fewer than ten thousand members. Like the Bohemian-Moravian Brethren, the Waldensians of Savoy and the Piedmont also dropped the practice of believer’s baptism 21 and instituted infant baptism in order to win the approval of the Genevan Reformers, and later also, in contrast to their old Prussia 43 evangelical usage, reached for the sword to defend themselves from religious persecution! The present Waldensians, existing in only a small remnant— ca. 18,000, according to some 25,000, according to others, fewer— have retained much that is good from their early history and constitute a salutary evangelical element in Italy.

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…