Another thought - Well, we DID meet, that time you came to Berlin.....Josh wrote: ↑Sun May 19, 2024 8:10 pmI have yet to meet any Russian Mennonite person that refers to themselves as "Dutch Mennonites". Amongst Holdeman circles, everyone refers to themselves as Russian Mennonites if they want to get into ethnic background details.Neto wrote: ↑Sun May 19, 2024 7:21 pmThis is a site that is specifically about people from Dutch Mennonite heritage.
So also the Mennonite History and Genealogy FaceBook group, of which I am a member. I'm sure I have a number on GMOL (GrandMa OnLine), but I do not have a subscription. All of my ancestors are Plautdietsch, so as I say, "I don't have as man ancestors as most people". (Because a lot of them are the same people...) I reckon it's much the same for people of Swiss Brethren background. (Our daughter & her husband are distantly related to one another around 6 different ways, and not only am I not of any Swiss Brethren extraction at all, but this is only from looking in the 'Raber Book".)
Then along a different line, I also say I'm Dutch Mennonite when wanting to make a distinctive reference to the Dutch "baptism-minded" as distinct from the Swiss Brethren heritage and tradition. And, there were also Swiss Mennonites in Russia, and they were not Plautdietsch people. So 'Dutch Mennonite' is an ethnic description that goes back farther than does "Russian Mennonite", which I do not consider an accurate ethnic description. (And, also even farther back than is the Plautdietsch identity.) I would have to go back and find all of my uses of 'Dutch Mennonite' to be sure this is accurate, but I THINK I use the term in these two ways or for these two distinctions: as an Ethnic reference, and as a theological reference (that is, as distinct from Swiss Brethren tradition). Many people, however, use even just "Mennonite" as an ethnic reference. For me, it is primarily a theological reference. I realize that many consider it a cultural reference, but since there are very significant cultural differences within that general category, I choose to use more exact terminology. It's a bit like someone saying they are 'Cherokee', or 'Osage', as opposed to saying that they are 'American Indian', or 'Native American'. (Then there are also language family distinctions as well.)