Perilous Journey: The Mennonite Brethren in Russia 1860-1910, John B. Toews, 1988

produced a strong sense of belonging, even in small, remote communities. In such a setting intimacy with members of the Old Church gradually became less urgent. The Brethren flirtation with the Baptists was a contentious issue for the Old Church from the beginning. Why did the Baptist question become such a barrier to inter-Mennonite under- standing, especially since many in the Old Church had also broadened the base of their spiritual quests through foreign contacts? The answer is probably not too complex. The conserva- tive majority had its customs and traditions, its ecclesiastical leadership and liturgical patterns. The dissenting minority by rejecting the old created a vacuum which had to be filled. Baptists with their theology, preaching styles and church polity intact were readily available in the 1860s and 1870s. Here was a big brother for the wilful but lonely orphan. The price of friendship meant tolerating Baptist militarism and tobacco smoke, but with it came a group capable of sound biblical teaching and preaching, committed to the believers' church and the immersionist baptismal mode. The Baptist connection was sustained by ongoing contacts during the 1880s and 1890s. The problems continued as well. Several Baptist related issues still fueled inter-Mennonite 80 tensions early in the twentieth century. Brethren allowed Baptist believers to participate in their communion services on the basis of their immersion baptism, but often refused to admit believing Mennonites baptized by sprinkling. Generally Baptists were accepted as members in Brethren congregations without rebaptism while adults baptized on faith in the Old Church were rebaptized by immersion. 7 Baptist ministers were usually allowed to preach in Brethren meeting houses while Mennonite preachers were not. The Baptist connection, a separate peoplehood, a defined conversion, village politics, mutual memories of past hurts and excesses — were the things which divided Mennonites from each other really stronger than those which united? What of the fact that all were strangers and pilgrims in an alien land, that Russia tolerated them for their economic productivity and not out of respect for their nonconformity? Should not external pressures generate a cohesiveness capable of overcoming internal religious differences? What of the common life experience in the context of the village? Mennonites still ate the same food, slept in similar houses and farmed in a uniform way. Ultimately different religious persuasions co-existed in one socio-economic frame. In this setting there were fortunately a number of forces which conspired to break down barriers. One of these coincided with the emergence of the Brethren. By the mid-nineteenth century rapid population growth had shattered the social and economic tranquility of the old settlements. The rapid absorption of reserve land created a group of landless Mennonites which at times