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 571 (not an original page number)

Unit 571 of 984. Only the selected source passage is shown.
Exact extracted unit
ccording to the following basic principles: “1) Places of service, preferably within the boundaries of the New-Russian territory * and the neighboring provinces are made available to them for carrying out their active service: a) in the work-places of the marine department; b) in the fire brigades; and c) in special mobile detachments of the forestry department, which are responsible for the planting of forests in South Russia. “2) The obligatory service of the Mennonites is subject to the same time schedules as are established by law for military service. “3) Mennonites in the service are united into special groups so that Military Service and Emigration 597 they may have their joint prayers according to their rules of faith. “4) Upon completion of their active service the Mennonites, in the event of war, will similarly be used only for the kinds of service mentioned in article 1.” c) The Treaty of June 25, 1880, 27 between the Ministry of Crown §276 Lands (in which department the Mennonites are placed) and the Mennonite i mmuni ty states, in its main points, the following, concerning 20 years of service exclusively in the forests: The number of detachments is set at six. 28 Each detachment has a director (“Mennonit-Starschina”), elected by the Mennonite communities whose task it is, together with a few indispensable assistants, to supervise the Mennonite workers in their leisure as well as to direct the business affairs of the detachment. At the end of each month this Mennonite director presents a receipt for the wages which the Ministry of Crown Lands pays in the amount prescribed by the government. 18. In spite of the gracious concessions of the imperial government, §277 a migration was nevertheless begun, as indicated above. The waves of this movement splashed over into the Mennonite Brethren circles as well. Abram Unger was cold towards this movement; Johann Claassen, on the other hand, enthusiastic. He was carrying on energetic correspondence concerning the migration with Eduard Leppke (see above: “Baptists as super Mennonites”). He died, however, before carrying out his intentions to pioneer once more in a new, strange land. God had no more assignments for him in America nor, indeed, in this world. Abraham Schellenberg finally also went in 1879 as is well known. He explained his position regarding this issue at a meeting of a General Conference of Mennonite Brethren in Andreasfeld, May, 1874. (According to the minutes): “He is attempting to settle the emotions and to delay the migration somewhat. Whoever did not feel called to serve in Russia should emigrate; those feeling otherwise, should remain.” Furthermore, "every caution must be exercised concerning the migration since unfavorable news has also been received from America.” We can see that Brother A. Schellenberg was no Leppke and no Sudermann. If a certain uneasiness and anxiety concerning the future in Russia (this is how

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…