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

n of the believers' church regardless of consequences. One called for public order, one for revival. They had difficulty hearing one another. Meaningful communication became impossible when a radical fringe insisted the Brethren divest themselves of their remaining religious traditions and engage in excessive celebrations of joy. The spiritual violence associated with early Brethren dissent, especially the exuberance movement, did little permanent damage. The rapid normalization following the June Reforms was an eloquent testimony to the moderate theology of most secessionists. The long term balance between experience and discipleship generated considerable vitality in the Brethren pilgrimage during subsequent decades. Generally their concept of discipleship was shaped within the community, not imported from elsewhere. Evangelism and nurture occurred simul- taneously within the congregation. Individualism had little opportunity to create aberrations or generate excesses. Itinerant ministers, annually elected by the constituency, owed their appointment to the fact that they reflected community norms and values. Their messages focused on the conversion and the ongoing pilgrimage, at least judging from the surviving sermons. All this was conducive to uniformity and stability. Little wonder that late nineteenth century converts extolled the intimate fellowship offered in Brethren congregations. By 1900 the Brethren possessed a firm sense of their own peoplehood and were heirs to an accumulative religious tradition. Did the predictable home Bible studies, special festivals, ministerial visits and sermons possibly spawn a peoplehood which was too insular? There was the temptation to hold the line, to affirm old values and practices. Some of the Brethren may have 92 been threatened by the rapid economic, intellectual and spiritual expansion of the Russian Mennonite world in the early twentieth century. The succession of ministers and Bible teachers from Germany presented a special dilemma. They preached an orthodox Gospel yet insisted on loose borders for the believers' church. As long as faith was present, they insisted, the baptismal mode should not bar the individual from communion partici- pation. While a few Brethren embraced the new visions fomented by the Allianz, the many insisted on closed communion and threatened to excommunicate the liberals in their midst. It seemed that by 1910 a half century of growth and development once again produced orthodoxy. The style of house and worship services became sacrosanct. The path of conversion was precisely prescribed while the mode of baptism remained fixed. Such rigidity, while crippling, was not fatal to the vitality of congregational life. In the decades which followed, several developments, potentially restorative, gave the Brethren soul no rest. There was the broad-ranging interest in education which not only saw the erection of schools at h