| Old Believers |
Article Index for Old |
Website Links For Old |
Information AboutOld Believers |
|
The Old Believers () broke loose after 1666-67 from the hierarchy of the Russian Orthodox Church as a protest against the reforms introduced by Patriarch Nikon . The schism itself is known as '' Raskol '' (раскол). INTRODUCTION In 1652 , Patriarch Nikon (1605–1681) of the Russian Orthodox Church introduced a number of ritual and textual innovations to impose uniformity between Russian and Greek Orthodox practices. Nikon, having noticed discrepancies between Russian and Greek rites and texts, ordered an adjustment of the Russian rites to the Greek ones of his time, without consulting any one of the clergy and without gathering a council. Once these innovations were carried out, they who acted contrary to them were anathemized and suppressed by state power. These traditionalists are known as Old Believers or Old Ritualists. THE REFORMS OF PATRIARCH NIKON By the middle of the 17th Century Russian Church officials, including Patriarch Nikon had noticed discrepancies between contemporary Russian and Greek Rite s. The conclusion was made that the Russian Orthodox Church had, as a result of errors of incompetent copyists, developed rites and missal texts of its own that had significantly deviated from the Greek originals. Thus, the Russian Orthodox Church had become dissonant from the other Orthodox churches. Nikon, supported by Tsar Alexis I ( 1629 - 1676 ), executed some preliminary liturgical reforms. In 1652 , he convened a Synod and exhorted the clergy on the need to compare Russian Typikon , Euchologion , and other liturgical books with their Greek counterparts. Monasteries from all over Russia were requested to send examples to Moscow in order to subject them to a comparative analysis. Such a task would have taken many years of conscientious research and would have been unlikely to give an unambiguous result, given the complex development of the Russian liturgical texts over the past centuries and an almost complete lack of textual Historigraphic techniques at the time. Having observed some discrepancies between the Russian and contemporary Greek rites and missal texts, patriarch Nikon ordered an adjustment of the Russian rites and texts to correspond to the Greek, without summoning a church council or consulting any Russian ecclesiastic authority. As research in the history of liturgic texts at that time was nearly nonexistent, no one could explain to him that these discrepancies were not necessarily the result of Russian errors of arbitrary textual revisions (...). – Zenkovsky S.A. Russia’s Old Believers, 1970, 1995, p. 9 A second synod was convened under ''locum tenens'' Pitirim Of Krutitsy in 1666 , which included the Patriarchs of Antioch and of Alexandria and many bishops to Moscow. It is alleged by historians that the visiting patriarchs each received both 20,000 roubles in gold and furs for their participation. This council officially established the reforms and anathemized both all those against the reforms and the old Russian books and rites themselves. A side effect of condemning the past of the Russian Orthodox Church and her traditions was a weaking of the messianic theory about Moscow as the Third Rome . Instead of being the guardian of Orthodox faith, Russia seemed to be an accumulation of serious liturgical mistakes. Nevertheless, both Patriarch and Tsar were anxious to carry out their reforms, although their endeavours may have been as much or more politically motivated as religious; several authors on this subject (S.A. Zenkovsky, B.P. Kutuzov) point out that Tsar Alexis, encouraged by his military success in the war with Poland to liberate Westrussian provinces and the Ukraine, grew ambitious of becoming the liberator of all orthodox countries which at that time were part of the Ottoman Empire. They also mention the role of the Near East Patriarchs, who actively supported the idea of the Russian Tsar becoming the liberator of all Orthodox Christians. Specific Differences between Traditional Russian and New Practices Several alterations were made in the Russian rites, including, but not limited to the following: Other differences are noted below. While such variations may appear trivial to many modern readers, they were enormous in number. Furthermore, they were imposed in an autocratic fashion, with only minimal consultation of the people who would be subject to them, and reaction against the Nikonian reforms could have been as much against the manner of imposition as the actual alterations. In addition, changes made in the texts were often arbitrary. "For example, wherever the books read 'храмъ' they substituted 'церковь' [church , and wherever they read "церковь" they substituted 'храмъ.'"[http://www.synaxis.info/azbuka/language/differences.html] VALIDITY OF THE REFORMIST THEORY: SOURCES OF RUSSIAN TRADITIONS Russia had been officially Christianized in 988 by Greek and Bulgarian missionaries and adopted the Greek Orthodox liturgical practices. In the end of 11th century, the so-called ''Studite Typicon'' was introduced in Russia through the efforts of St. Theodosius of the Caves in Kiev (''Феодосий Киево-Печерский'', d. 1074). This ''typicon'' (essentially, a guide-book for liturgical and monastic life) reflected the traditions of urban monastic community of the famous Studion monastery in Constantinople. The ''Studite typicon'' was predominant throughout the western part of the Byzantine Empire and was accepted throughout the Russian lands. In the end of 14th century, through the work of St. Cyprian , metropolitan of Moscow and Kiev , the Studite liturgical practices were gradually replaced in Russia with the so-called ''Jerusalem Typicon'' or the ''Typicon of St. Sabbas'' - originally, an adaptation of the Studite liturgy to the customs of Palestinian monasteries. The process of gradual change of ''typica'' would continue throughout the 15th century and, because of its slow implementation, met with little resistance - unlike the Nikon's reforms, conducted with abruptness and violence. However, in the course of 15th-17th centuries, Russian scribes continued to insert some Studite material into the general shape of ''Jerusalem Typicon''. This explains the differences between the modern version of the ''Typicon'', used by the Russian Orthodox Church , and the pre-Nikonian Russian recension of ''Jerusalem Typicon'', called ''Oko Tserkovnoe'' (Rus. "eye of the church"). This pre-Nikonian version, based on the Moscow printed editions of 1610 , 1633 and 1641 , continues to be used by modern Old Believers. However, in the course of the polemics against Old Believers, the "official" Russian Orthodox Church often claimed that discrepancies which emerged in the texts between the Russian and the Greek churches, were Russian innovations, errors, or arbitrary translations. This charge of "Russian innovation" would be redundantly repeated in the textbooks and anti-''raskol'' treatises and catecheses, including, e.g., those by Dimitry Of Rostov . The critical evaluation of the sources and of the essence of Nikonian reforms began only in the 1850s with the groundbreaking work of Nikolai F. Kapterev ( 1847 - 1917 ), continued later by Serge Zenkovsky . Kapterev demonstrated - for the first time to the wider Russian audience - that the rites, rejected and condemned by the Nikonian reforms, were genuine customs of the Orthodox Church which suffered alterations in the Greek usage during the 15th-16th centuries, but remained unchanged in Russia . The pre-Nikonian liturgical practices, including some elements of the Russian typicon, ''Oko Tserkovnoe'', were demonstrated to have preserved many earlier Byzantine material, being actually closer to the earlier Byzantine texts than some later Greek customs (Kapterev, N.F. 1913; Zenkovsky, S.A. 2006). Remarkably, the scholars who opened the new avenues for re-evaluation of the reform by the Russian Church - Kapterev, E.E. Golubinsky - were themselves members of the "official" church, who took up study of the causes and background of the reforms and resulting schism. Their research showed that the official theory regarding the old Russian books and rites was unsustainable. Of Kapterev's work, it was stated that he
THE SCHISM OR "RASKOL" Opponents of the ecclasiastical reforms of Nikon could be found among all strata of the people and were quite numerous at the beginning (see Raskol ). Even after the deposition of patriarch Nikon (1658), who presented too strong a challenge to the Tsar's authority, a series of church councils officially endorsed Nikon's liturgical reforms. The Old Believers fiercely rejected all innovations and the most radical amongst them maintained that the official Church fell into the hands of the Antichrist. Under guidance of Archpriest Avvakum Petrov (1620 or 1621-1682), who had become the leader of the conservative camp within the Old Believers’ movement, the Old Believers publicly denounced and rejected all ecclesiastical reforms. The state church anathemized both the old rites and books and those who wished to stay loyal to them at the synod of 1666 . From that moment, the Old Believers were officially deprived of all civil rights. The state church had the most active Old Believers arrested and several of them were executed some years later in 1682 , including Archpriest Avvakum. After the schism After 1685 a period of persecutions began, including both torture and execution. Many Old Believers fled Russia, altogether. However, Old Believers became the dominant denomination in many regions; among them were Pomorye ( Arkhangelsk region), Guslitsy , Kursk region, Urals , Siberia etc. By the 1910s , about 25% of the population in Russia said that they belonged to one of the Old Believer branches (census data). Government oppression could vary from relatively moderate, as under Peter The Great (Old Believers had to pay double taxation and a separate tax for wearing a beard), to intense, as under Tsar Nicholas I . To the Russian synodal state church and the state authorities Old Believers were often seen as dangerous elements and a threat to the Russian state. In 1905 Tsar Nicholas II signed an Act of religious freedom, which put the persecutions of all religious minorities in Russia to an end. The Old Believers were given the right to build churches, to ring church bells, to hold processions and to organize themselves. It was prohibited (as under Catherine The Great ) to refer to Old Believers as “raskolniki” (schismatics), a name they consider to be insulting. The period from 1905 until 1917 is often called “the Golden Age of the Old Faith”. This period may be called the emancipation of the Old Believers, who had until then been in an almost illegal position in Russian society. Nevertheless some restrictions for Old Believers were maintained: e.g. they had no right to join civil service. Modern situation . Photo by Mikhail Evstafiev .]] In 1971 , the Moscow Patriarchate revoked the anathemas placed on the Old Believers in the 17th century, but most Old Believer communities have not returned to Communion with other Orthodox Christians. The total number of Old Believers that remain today is estimated from 1 to 10 millions, some living in extremely isolated communities in places to which they fled centuries ago to avoid persecution. A few Old Believer parishes in the United States have entered into communion with the Russian Orthodox Church Outside Russia {Link without Title} . Old Believer churches are currently restored in Russia, although Old Believers (unlike the nearly official mainstream Orthodoxy) are facing many difficulties in claiming their ( Popovtsy of Belokrinitskaya Hierarchy official center), a cathedral for Novozybkovskaya Hierarchy in Zamoskvorech'ye and Preobrazhenskaya Zastava where Pomortsy and Fedoseevtsy coexist. Only Pomortsy and Fedoseevtsy treat each other relatively well; all the other denominations do not acknowledge each other. Among the ordinary Old Believers, there are some tendencies for intra-branch Ecumenism , but these trends find sparse support among the official leaders of the congregations. Significant Old Believer communities exist in Plamondon, Alberta ; Woodburn, Oregon ; Erie, Pennsylvania ; Erskine, Minnesota and various parts of Alaska . A compact 40,000 strong Lipovan community of Old Believers lives in neighboring Kiliia Raion ( Vilkovo ) of Ukraine and the Tulcea County of Romania in the Danube Delta . OLD BELIEVER DENOMINATIONS Despite that all Old Believers groups emerged as a result of the opposition to the Nikonian reform, they do not constitute a single monolithic body. In fact, the Old Believers are notable for the great diversity of groups that profess different interpretations of the church tradition and often are not in communion with each other. Some groups even practice rebaptism before admitting a member of another group into their midst. The terminology that is used for the divisions within the Old Believer denomination is somewhat vague. Generally, larger movement or group - especially in case of such major ones as ''popovtsy'' and ''bespopovtsy'' - is called ''soglasie'' or ''soglas'' (Eng. "agreement" or more generally, "confession"). Another term - ''tolk'' (Eng. "teaching") is usually applied to lesser divisions within the major "confessions". In particular it is used with respect to multiple sects that appeared within the ''bespopovtsy'' movement. Popovtsy and Bespopovtsy Since none of the bishops joined the Old Believers, except bishop Pavel of )) and the non-priestist Old Believers (беспоповцы ( Bespopovtsy )). The Popovtsy represented the more moderate conservative opposition, who strived to continue religious and church life as it had existed before the reforms of Nikon. They recognized any ordained priests from the new style Russian Orthodox church who joined the Old Believers and who had denounced the Nikonian reforms. In 1846 they convinced Amvrosii (Popovich, 1791 - 1863 ) deposed Greek Orthodox bishop (who had been removed under Turkish pressure) to become an Old Believer and to consecrate three Russian Old Believers priests as bishops. In 1859, the number of Old Believer bishops in Russia reached ten, and they established their own episcopate, the so called Belokrinitskaya Hierarchy . Not all priestist Old Believers recognized this hierarchy. These dissenters were called беглопоповцы (beglopopovtsy) and obtained their own hierarchy in the 1920’s. The Bespopovtsy (the "priestless") were characterized by rejecting “the World” where Antichrist reigned; they preached the imminent end of the world, asceticism, adherence to the old rituals and the old faith. The Bespopovtsy claimed that the true church of Christ had ceased to exist on Earth and therefore renounced priests and all sacraments except Baptism. The Bespopovtsy movement has many sub-groups. Soglasie and Tolk
Minor Groups Aside from these major groups, many smaller groups emerged and died out at various times since the end of 17th century:
Break-off sects The Old Believers movement also gave birth to several marginal break-off groups such as:
and others. However, these break-off groups were always considered Heretical by all the 'mainstream' Old Believers. JUSTIFICATION OF OLD BELIEF The Old Believer schism did not occur simply as a result of a few individuals with power and influence. The schism had complex causes, revealing historical processes and circumstances in 17th century Russian society. Those who broke loose from the hierarchy of the official State Church had quite divergent views on church, faith, society, state power and social issues. Thus, “Old believers” is merely a collective noun for various movements in Russian society which actually had existed long before 1666-67. The things they had in common were a distrust towards state power and the episcopate, insisting upon the right of the people to arrange its own spiritual life, and the ambition to aim for such control. Both the popovtsy and bespopovtsy, although theologically and psychologically two different teachings, were manifestations of a spiritual, eschatological and mystical tendencies throughout Russian religious thought and church life. The schism should also be seen within the political and cultural backgrounds of that time: increasing Western influence, Secularization , and attempts to subordinate the Church to the state. Nevertheless, it was above all the purity of the Orthodox faith, embodied in the old rituals, which the Old believers sought to defend and preserve and which inspired many to strive against patriarch Nikon’s church reforms until death. The Old believers movement has often been depicted as an obscure, fanatic faith in rituals that has led to the deaths of tens of thousands of ignorant people. All people of that time, however, felt that ritual expressed the very essence of their faith. Otherwise, Patriarch Nikon would have felt no need to alter Russian practices. Old believers hold that for the preservation of a certain ‘microclimate’ that enables the salvation of one's soul it is not only necessary to live by the commandments of Christ , but also to carefully preserve Church tradition, which contains the spiritual power and knowledge of past centuries, embodied in external forms. The circumstance that the church reforms of Nikon considered mainly liturgical texts and rituals, sometimes leads to a view of the Old believers faith as being extremely conservative, not able to develop, and preferring form to content. From an Old believers' point of view, the idea of contents ''a priori'' prevailing over form is simplistic. Their response could be illustrated by considering poetry. If one converts a poem into prose, the "contents" of the poem may remain intact, but the poem will lose its charm, emotional impact, and much of its ability to influence an audience's reaction, moreover, the poem will essentially no longer exist. In the case of religious rituals, form and contents are not just two separable, autonomous entities, but are connected to each other by complex relations, including theological, psychological, phenomenal, esthetic and historic dimensions. These aspects, in their turn, play a role in the perception of these rituals by the faithful and in their spiritual lives. Considering the fact that Church rituals from the very beginning have been connected with doctrinal truth, changing these rituals can have a tremendous effect on religious conscience and a severe impact on the faithful. Nevertheless, centuries of persecution and the nature of their origin have made them very culturally conservative and mistrustful of anything they see as insufficiently Russian. Some Old Believers go so far as to consider any pre-Nikonian Orthodox Russian practice or artifact to be exclusively theirs, denying that the Russian Orthodox Church has any claims upon a history before Patriarch Nikon. However, late 19th century/early 20th century history shows that the Old Believer merchant families were more flexible and more open to innovations while creating factories and starting the first Russian industries. This observation is an apparent contradiction with the official doctrine of the Old Believers' faith, but centuries of struggle developed in them a habit of working and living without great concern for the state and mainstream cultural influences. Old Believers also lent money to each other with a much lower interest rate than any financial institutions and individuals, which helped them to arrange a cross-financing network and to accumulate capital. DETAILED DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE OLD BELIEVERS AND POST-NIKONIAN RUSSIAN ORTHODOXY
SIMILARITIES BETWEEN OLD BELIEVERS AND PROTESTANTS , Latvia .]] Despite the fact that the Old Believers movement was created as a reaction to a reform, not as a 'reform' itself, the views and the philosophy of the movement in some aspects strongly resemble Protestant philosophy (particularly Amish , Hutterites , Mennonites and other very socially conservative denominations). This makes some people argue that Old Believers' appearance can be treated as a part of the pan-European Reformation processes. Similarities between Old Believers and Protestants have been seen as follows:
It is important to understand, however, that the very philosophical basis of Old Believers was opposite of that of Protestants . Old Believers were trying to save the old heritage, not to make a reform, or even to return to something 'more old'. They were conservators, not reformers. And only a need for struggle for freedom of faith later made them apparently similar to Protestants . It is also noteworthey that "protestant" is a theological obscenity among conservative old believers, so a statement of similarity between these religious groups' philosophies may provide great offense. REFERENCES AND SELECT BIBLIOGRAPHY NB All these works are written by scholars and scientists, none of them Old believers, except for Melnikov, who was an Old believer apologete. In English: Cherniavsky, M., The Reception of the Council of Florence in Moscow and Shevchenko I., Ideological Repercussions of the Council of Florence, Church History XXIV (1955), 147-157 and 291-323 (articles) Crummey, Robert O. The Old Believers & The World Of Antichrist; The Vyg Community & The Russian State, Wisconsin U.P., 1970 Gill, T. The Council of Florence, Cambridge, 1959 Zenkovsky, Serge A. The ideology of the Denisov brothers, Harvard Slavic Studies, 1957. III, 49-66 Zenkovsky, S.: The Old Believer Avvakum, Indiana Slavic Studies, 1956, I, 1-51 Zenkovsky, Serge A.: Pan-Turkism and Islam in Russia, Harvard U.P., 1960 and 1967 Zenkovsky, S.: The Russian Schism, Russian Review, 1957, XVI, 37-58 In Russian: Зеньковский С.А. Русское старообрядчество, том I и II, Москва 2006 / Zenkovskij S.A. “Russia’s Old Believers”, part I and II, Moscow 2006 Голубинский Е.Е. История русской церкви, Москва 1900 / Golubinskij E.E. “History of the Russian Church”, Moscow 1900 Голубинский Е.Е. К нашей полимике со старообрядцами, ЧОИДР, 1905 / “Contribution to our polemics with Old believers”, ČOIDR, 1905 Каптерев Н.Ф. Патриарх Никон и его противники в деле исправления церковныx обрядов, Москва 1913 / Kapterv N.F. “Patriarch Nikon and his opponents in the correction of church rituals”, Moscow 1913 Каптерев Н.Ф. Характер отношений России к православному востоку в XVI и XVII вв., Москва 1914/Kapterev N.F. Charakter of the relationships between Russia and the orthodox East in the XVI and XVII cent., Moscow 1914 Карташов А.В. Очерки по иситории русской церкви, Париж 1959 / Kartašov A.V. “Outlines of the history of the Russian chruch”, Paris 1959 Ключевский И.П. Сочинения, I – VIII, Москва 1956-1959 / Ključevskij I.P. Works, I – VIII, Moscow 1956-1959 Кутузов Б.П. Церковная «реформа» XVII века, Москва 2003 / Kutuzov B.P. “The church “reform” of the XVII century”, Moscow 2003 Мельников Ф.И., Краткая история древлеправославной (старообрядческой) церкви. Барнаул, 1999 (Russian) / Melnikov F.I., 1999 “Short history of the Old orthodox (Old ritualist) Church” Barnaul 1999 Old Believer Churches
EXTERNAL LINKS
|