← 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 562 (not an original page number)
Unit 562 of 984. Only the selected source passage is shown.
The
latter introduced the delegates to the Minister of Crown Lands who was,
then, the chief authority over all the colonies. The Minister regretted the
fact that the two elders, after a seventy-year stay of the Mennonites in
Russia, could not speak the Russian language and declared this a sin.
Minister Epp’s assurance that efforts were being made to make up for
this neglect, he answered with: “Too late!”
4. A presentation of the basic principles of non-resistance was made,
at Baron Medem’s request, showing exactly how they grow out of the
(Mennonite) articles of faith. The document (contained in its entirety in
D.H. Epp’s book, which we have cited, as well as in several manuscripts
in our archives) is signed: “Church elders: Gerhard Dueck and Leonhard
Sudermann; Minister Franz Isaak, Peter Goertz and Heinrich Epp;
Church member Hermann Janzen. St. Petersburg, March 2, 1871.”
5. On the date cited the six men were received by the president of
the Commission for working out the legislation concerning compulsory
military service, Count Heyden. The Count told them that it was
intended from the very beginning that the Mennonites’ Confession of
Faith should be taken into consideration and that they would in any case
not be expected to take up arms,— only to render medical services, and
even this "not until about 25 years later.” (?) The explanation by Elder
Sudermann, at the second meeting with the Count on the following day,
that the Mennonites could not participate even in the medical corps if it
was affiliated with the military, upset the Count. He voiced his opinion
to the effect that the Mennonites would then have to look for another
country where no duties whatsoever existed towards the state. He asked,
furthermore, “whether the Mennonites recognized any state organization
at all?” Elder Sudermann who did not understand him, answered: “No."
This would no doubt have caused another misunderstanding on the
Count’s part had Sudermann not added immediately that the Menno-
nites acknowledge the authorities over them, obey them and pray for
them. In answer to the question, what he would do in case of war,
Sudermann said: "I would be reconciled, go to meet the enemy and
588
THE STATE
embrace him , 10 but I would not kill!” The Count smiled and suggested
that no state could exist if everyone did not want to take up arms, and
so the Mennonites contribute nothing useful whatsoever to the state.
When Sudermann remained silent, Minister Epp spoke up: “If people
followed the example of non-resistance they would draw back from any
kind of fighting whatsoever.” Count Medem, Count Heyden’s adjutant
(a young commander of the guards), laughed and suggested that if all
people were Mennonites there would be no war at all! Count Heyden then
explained that the delegates could do nothing further for their cause at
this time and that they were thus at liberty to drive home. He would
inform them at the appropriate time
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…