← 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 601 (not an original page number)
Unit 601 of 984. Only the selected source passage is shown.
ven to us. To be sure, we are described as a sect
in several other places, as, for instance, in article 179, Vol. IV of the
military law, and in the supplement of the same of May 14, 1875,
concerning the Mennonites; but, according to our judgment, such a
designation contradicts the literal meaning of the fundamental law about
denominations (Vol. I, Division 1). Since the beginning of the settlement
of Mennonites at the close of the eighteenth century, until the seventies
§294
632
MATTERS OF FAITH
of the last century, our religious fellowship has been called the
‘Mennonite Brotherhood’ in written communications of Russian
authorities (alongside the so-called Moravian Evangelical Brotherhood
organized by Count Zinzendorf). Neither in the Charter of Privileges
granted by Tsar Paul I in 1800 (of which a substantial part has been
incorporated in the mentioned articles 1104 and 1105), nor in the Colonial
Decree which constitutes the second part of Vol. XII of the Code of
Laws, are we called a ‘sect.’ The complete equality of the Mennonites
with other Christian denominations is, among other things, also
confirmed through the articles of the Colonial Decree with respect to
schools. Here the fathers (Catholic), the pastors (Lutheran and
Reformed), and the ecclesiastical ministers of the Mennonites are all
obligated to supervise the religio-ethical training of youth, an obligation
which to this day belongs to the clergy of those of other faiths among the
(former) German colonists, as this has been reiterated in the highest
decrees of 1881 and later.
"In Article 1104 the reference is not to ‘rules and customs’ of this
sect, but to ‘church’ rules and customs. According to Article 1105, the
ministers of the Mennonites practice the duties of their office not
according to the rules of their ‘sect,’ but of their ‘denomination.’ In the
same point there is also an allusion to their ‘priestly dignity,' a
designation which in the spirit of Russian legislation cannot be applied
to the leader of a sect.
“From such form of the text and the codification of the law during
the years 1800 and 1801 about the Mennonites, it is clearly evident that
Imperial legislation does not view the Mennonites as a Protestant
‘sect’, but as one of ‘several communions of Protestant confession.’ In
this number, under a general heading, the ‘Evangelical Reformed
Church’ is mentioned in first place (p. 185, Division 3). In general, the
concept of ‘sect’ as applying to Christians of other faiths is foreign to
Russian legislation; it only knows of sects which are composed of
persons who have seceded from the Orthodox Church. All other religious
communions recognized by law are designated as ‘denominations,’
which are divided into two main categories: Christian and non-Christian.
The Christian [denominations] are divided, however, into orthodox and
those of other faiths or foreign denominations. In this latter category all
branches of the
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…