Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-skm99 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T09:45:21.363Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Liturgy and Community Among Old Believers, 1905-1917

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 January 2017

Roy R. Robson
Roy R. Robson*
Affiliation:
Department of History, Boston College
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Without liturgy there is no Christianity.

–Old Believer Bishop Mikhail

The term Old Believers (or Old Ritualists) refers to a number of groups that arose as a result of Russian church reforms, 1654-1666, when Patriarch Nikon sought to make Russian practices conform to their contemporary Greek counterparts. Conscious of both a departure from tradition and an encroachment of central control over local autonomy, Old Believers endeavored to maintain the rites, symbols and prerogatives of traditional Russian Orthodoxy. With support of the tsar, Nikon began bloody persecutions that lasted, though in lesser degrees, until the decree of religious tolerance in 1905.

Type
Articles
Information
Slavic Review , Volume 52 , Issue 4 , Winter 1993 , pp. 713 - 724
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Slavic, East European, and Eurasian Studies. 1993

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Mikhail, Episkop, “Ob liturgii,” Tserkov', no. 35 (1910): 866 Google Scholar. Research for this article was made possible through the assistance of the IIE/Fulbright Fellowship.

2. The dominant or Russian Orthodox Church, administered after the reforms of Peter I by the Holy Synod, shall be referred herein as the “Russian Orthodox Church.” This name has been accepted as the official designation for the institution and was its formally recognized legal title. Using it in this context does not imply that the Old Believers were not part of the Russian Orthodox tradition. It does mean, however, that the Old Believers in no way constituted a segment of the institution called the Russian Orthodox Church. While the word “Nikonian” (after the patriarch Nikon whose reforms prompted the original schism) has been used by Old Believers to denote members of the Russian Orthodox Church, the term is in its own way as denigrating as “schismatic.” On occasion, however, it is useful to designate “practices known in the official church after the reforms of the patriarch Nikon in 1654-1666” simply as “post-reform” or even “Nikonian. ” C

3. These historians produced much work. The most important contributions include those by Shchapov, A., Raskol staroobriadchestva (Kazan, 1859 Google Scholar) and Zemstvo i raskol (St. Petersburg, 1862), previously published as a serial in Otchestvenniia zapiska (1861) and Beguny vremia (1862); Andreev, V. V., Raskol i ego znachenie v narodnoi russkoi istorii (St. Petersburg, 1870 Google Scholar); Iuzov, I., Russkie dissidenty: starovery i dukhovnye khristiane (St. Petersburg, 1881 Google Scholar); the score of works by Druzhinin, V. G., especially Raskol na Donu v kontse XVII veka (St. Petersburg, 1889 Google Scholar); and the long, prolific career of Prugavin, A. S., including Raskol i sektantstvo v russkoi narodnoi zhizni: s kritycheskami zamechaniiami dukhovnogo tsenzora (St. Petersburg, 1905 Google Scholar). See also Raskol-sektanstvo: materialy dlia izucheniia religiozno-bytovykh dvizhenii russkogo naroda (Moscow, 1887); Staroobriadchestvo vo vtoroi polovine XIX v. (Moscow, 1904); and many articles in Vestnik evropy, Russkaia mysl', Istoricheskii vestnik, and others.

4. Meyendorff, Paul (Russia, Ritual, and Reform: The Liturgical Reforms of Nikon in the 17th Century [Crestwood: St. Vladimir's Seminary Press, 1991]Google Scholar) provides the latest attempt at comparison of prominent liturgical texts before and after the schism. The study includes a detailed, side-by-side compilation of the most important changes in orthe liturgy as found in various sluzhebniky. While a thorough compilation, Meyendorffs work makes few attempts to analyze the meaning of textual reforms. The definitive textual comparison, however, remains in Filaret, hieromonk, “Chin liturgii sv. Zlatousta po izlozheniiu staropechatnykh, novoispravlennogo i drevlepis'mennykh sluzhebnikov,” Bratskoe slovo, no. 2 (1876): 31-80; no. 3: 81-107.

5. Questions of the two-fingered sign of the cross, the number of alleluias, or the spelling of hus or Iisus for “Jesus” are significant for the task of following the vagaries of the schism's history, yet have already received serious attention. For an extensive bibliography of missionary and polemical material regarding Old Believer religious rite, see Sakharov, F., Literatura istorii i oblicheniia russkogo raskola vol. 1 (Tambov, 1887), 160–73Google Scholar; vol. 2 (St. Petersburg, 1892), 191-202; vol. 3 (St. Petersburg, 1900), 274-89.

6. My comparison of Old Believer liturgical texts from before the schism (including a 1630 sluzhebnik in the Slavonic Library, University of Helsinki) corroborates this claim.

7. An example—in text, format and binding the Book of Hours (chasovnik) published at the priestly Rogozhskoe Cemetery in 1912 corresponded perfectly with one printed by the priestless Preobrazhenskoe alms-house in 1908, although the former was intended for a priestly audience while the latter was for use among the priestless Old Believers.

8. Priestly Old Believers continued to lure priests away from the Synodal church; and in the mid-nineteenth century a large group known as the Belokrinitsy even founded its own hierarchy in Belo Krinitsa, Austria-Hungary. The Belokrinitsy clearly predominated among the priestly Old Believer organizations by the 1905 period.

9. These splits occurred over questions of marriage and the relationship of Old Believers to the outside world. The most numerous of the priestless groups was the Pomortsy, who accepted canonical marriage. Others, such as the Fedoseevtsy, hoped to keep their adherents celibate. Some, such as the Filippovtsy, suspected any non-Old Believer authorities as agents of antichrist.

10. “O tserkovno-obriadovom vospitanii v shkole,” Slovo tserkvi, no. 22 (1916): 484. See also “Tserkovnye obriady i staroobriadtsy,” Tserkov', no. 481 (1909): 1333-34.

11. “Obriadoverie,” Tserkov', no. 251 (1910): 631-32.

12. See, for example, “Bogosluzhenie i intelligentsiia,” Slovo tserkvi, no. 1 (1917): 9-10. Among the Orthodox (themselves known for attention to tradition in matters of rite and dogma), Old Believers stood out as particularly zealous adherents to the liturgical cycle. Robert Crummey has shown, for example, that Old Believer spirituality revolved around liturgical devotions rather than individual piety. See his “Spirituality of the Vyg Fathers” in Church, Nation, and State in Russia and Ukraine, ed. Geoffrey A. Hosking (New York: St. Martin's Press, 1991): 23-37.

13. Kirilov, I, “Sushchnost’ obriada,” Tserkov', no. 51 (1909): 1431 Google Scholar. “Narushiteliam sviatootecheskikh obychaev i ustavov,” Zlatostrui, no. 3 (1912-13): 11 has a similar theme.

14. See “Tserkovnye obriady i staroobriadtsy,” Tserkov1, no. 48 (1909): 1333-34.

15. Kirilov, 1431.

16. Cherniavsky, Michael, “The Old Believers and the New Religion,” Slavic Review 25 (1966): 1–39 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

17. Trudy o s “ezd staroobriadtsev vsego severo-zapadnogo, privislianskogo i pribaltiskogo kraev i drugikh gorodov rossisskoi imperii, sostoiavshemsiia v gorode Vil'ne 25-27 lanvaria 1906 goda (Vilnius: Tipografiia Shtaba Vilenskogo Voennogo Okruga, 1906), 199-200, remarks on the importance of thanking the tsar; and ” Predsobornoe soveshchanie dukhovnykh otsov i nachetchikov,” Pervyi vserossiiskii sobor khristian-pomortsev, priemliushchikh brak (Moscow: Moskovskaia Staroobriadcheskaia Knigopechatnia, 1909), 30, describes the correct prayer to be said for the tsar.

18. A. I. P., , “Protivoobshchinnyi sobor staroobriadtsev, nepriemliushchikh sviashchenstva,” Zlatostrui, no. 8 (1910-11): 41 Google Scholar.

19. See “Moleben za tsaria i liudi,” Shchit very, no. 9 (1914): 833-40.C

20. Sluzhebnik (Moscow: Tipografiia Rogozhskogo Kladbishcha, 1912)Google Scholar, folio 15.

21. Litanies were known among Old Believers only in the priestly communities, those without a hierarchal priesthood did not perform them.

22. Sluzhebnik (Moscow: Tipografiia Rogozhskogo Kladbishcha, 1912)Google Scholar, folio 109.

23. Sluzhebnik (St. Petersburg, 1913), 99.

24. Like the litiia and the litanies, the “Great Entry” was not used by priestless Old Believers.

25. Sluzhebnik (Moscow: Tipografiia Rogozhskogo Kladbishcha, 1912)Google Scholar, folio 133-34.

26. Sluzhebnik (St. Petersburg, 1913), 98-99.

27. For the old rite version, see Liturgii sviatogo Vasiliia Velikogo i prezhdeo-sviashchennaia (Moscow: Staroobriadcheskaia Rogozhskaia Kladbishcha Tipografiia, 1912)Google Scholar, folio 21; and Sluzhebnik (St. Petersburg, 1913), 221: “The priest and deacon also do and say [the Great Entry] as in the Liturgy of Chrysostom. ”

28. Pavlov, , “O velikom vykhod za liturgei,” Tserkov', no. 38 (1910): 9 Google Scholar.

29. St. Volotskii, Joseph, as quoted in “Otvety redaktsii,” Ural'skii staroobriadets, no. 3 (1916): 21–22Google Scholar.

30. Mikhail, Arkhimandrit, “Nuzhni li obriady,” Tserkov1, no. 11 (1911-12): 85 Google Scholar.

31. Priestless Old Believers took up this question in the Trudy o s “ezde staroobriadtsev, 188. The Syn tserkoxmyi, noted in these deliberations, often mentions the entrance and departure bows. For exact descriptions of entrance bows, see also ” Otvety redaktsii,” Zlatostrui, no. 6 (1911-12): 73-74.

32. Trudy o s “ezde staroobriadtsev, 190.

33. The question of Old Believer relations with outside society calls for more extensive research. For a good anthropological view of the problem, however, see Scheffel, David Z., In the Shadow of Antichrist: The Old Believers of Alberta (Lewiston: Broadview Press, 1991), 191–205 Google Scholar.

34. Psaltyr (Moscow: v Khristianskoi Tipografii pri Preobrazhenskom Bogadel'nom Dome, 1909)Google Scholar, folio 41-42, translation from Simon, Pimen, et al., eds., Drevopravoslavnyi molitvennik/Old Orthodox Prayer Book (Erie: Russian Orthodox [Old Ritual] Church of the Nativity, 1986), 355.Google Scholar

35. For an Old Believer explanation of bowing protocol, see Ustav o aomashnei molitve (Moscow: Khristianskiia Tipografiia pri preobrazhenskom Bogadel'nom Dome, 1908)Google Scholar, folio 22-31; and Ustav o domashnei molitve (Moscow: Moskovskoe Staroobriadcheskoe Knigopechatnie, 1909 Google Scholar), folio 22-31. See also an early Kannonik (Moscow: Tipografiia Edinovercheskaia Tserkov', 1822 Google Scholar), leaf 363, published by the edinovertsy. This book would have been identical to later Old Believer imprints and Old Believers often used edinovertsy publications in lieu of their own.

36. Syn tserkovnyi, folio 25-27; for translation see Simon, 374. The editors of Zlatostrui recommended the Syn tserkovnyi as a guide for Old Believer spiritual growth in “Otvety redaktsii,” Zlatostrui, no. 11 (1910-1911): 64.

37. Molodov, A, “Slovo o kreste i o krestnom znamenom,” Shchit very, no. 7 (1912): 582 Google Scholar.

38. Psaltyr, folio 51-52; translation from Simon, et al., 362. The most extensive Old Believer use of bows came during the Great Lent, during the service celebrating the Great Canon of Repentance by St. Andrew of Crete: believers typically made about 1000 prostrations. The old rite service book containing the canon said “We sing the canticles (irmosy) of the great canon in one night. During each song and each verse we make three prostrations, and there are 266 verses. Then we make seven prostrations, 100, 98.” Triod'postnaia (Moscow: Tipografiia pri Preobrazhenskom Bogadel'nom Dome, 1910), folio 437. See also Triod’ postnaia (Moscow: Moskovskoe Staroobriadcheskoe Knigopechatnie, 1912)Google Scholar, folio 437. The Russian Orthodox Church, however, eliminated this marathon of bowing even while retaining the service. Kanon velikii tvorenie sviatogo Andrea Kritskogo Ierusalemskogo (St. Petersburg, 1881) did not mention bows to be performed during the service.

39. Crummey, “Spirituality,” 28.

40. Syn tserkovnyi, folio 24; translation in Simon, 373-74.

41. “Otvety redaktsii,” Zlatostrui, no. 11 (1910-11): 62-63.

42. Vikula Vasil'eva Kaurova, “Moia zhizn’ v raskole i obrashchenie k pravoslavnoi tserkvi,” Eniseiskiia eparkhal'niia vedomosti, no. 20 (1904): 559. For a discussion of bows from the state church point of view, with an eye toward the Old Believers, see “Nikol'skogo edinovercheskogo monastyra nastoiatelia, Igumena Pavla, beseda s zashchitnikami avstriiskoi ierarkhii o trex sveshchakh: ego zhe Pavla beseda s staroobriadtsami o poklonakh,” Bratskoe slovo, no. 3 (1876): 144-51.