← 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 569 (not an original page number)
Unit 569 of 984. Only the selected source passage is shown.
Christian culture which could not have happened in
Russia without tragic consequences for the families. America now has
many of our Mennonite people, numbering in the thousands. They are
very industrious farming families which are enriching Kansas, Nebraska,
Dakota, Minnesota, etc., and are spreading even further into Texas, New
Mexico, and California. English Canada is also most glad for our
orthodox Mennonites because they are good land purchasers and farming
people. For us it was also good as stated above; and it was good for
Russia which was now free of these unmanageable, pious foster children
whom it was impossible to satisfy no matter how hard this modern
European state attempted to make every possible concession. At the
same time, however, the state retained the greatest part of the
Mennonite settlers. They allowed themselves to benefit from the
wholesome and useful Russian societal and educational circumstances
according to the gracious conditions, which astonished the political
world, permitted by the monarch of that time and protected by his noble
successors.
17. These conditions for reaching agreement between the Russian
government and the Mennonites were contained in the proposals which
General Totleben made by order of His Majesty, and were: a) accepted
when the Molotschna and Chortitza Mennonites petitioned in the
Military Service and Emigration
595
General’s name (April 1874); b) validated by law and confirmed by the
highest authority April 8, 1875, published by Senate ukase on May 14,
1875, 22 which outlined the Imperial Council's position concerning the
Mennonites’ responsibility towards military duty; and c) practically
applied in a treaty contracted for a 20 year period of time (on June 25 ff.
1880) between the Commissioner of the Federal Administration and the
lawful agencies of the Mennonites. (After expiration, renewed and
declared permanent by the Federal government.)
a) The petition of April 1874 reads as follows:
“To His High Excellency the Adjutant General von Totleben
“Your High Excellency: During the days when you were here, you
repeatedly and with unalterable determination, assured us and many of
our brothers that in the future, as heretofore, we would without change
enjoy the favor and grace of His Majesty, our most gracious Tsar and
lord. This was demonstrated anew in that His Majesty, through the
extraordinary dispatching of Your High Excellency, granted us the grace
to follow the basic teachings of our confession of faith while fulfilling the
universal personal military obligation by allowing us to perform a
non-military service outside the department of the war ministry, so that
we would not in any way be brought into relationship with the military
system.
“Most humbly we lay at the feet of His Majesty our deeply felt
thanks for the most gracious consideration shown us because of the basic
precepts of our faith, and our resulting obligation of conscience
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…