Topic: The Beloved Russian Old Ritualist Believers

[fatman2021]

I have found that the traditional Old Believers of Russia are worth taking a good look at. It was about 1000 years after Christ that the ruler of Russia took it upon himself and his resources to seek out the one Faith which the Lord has always been giving to the human race for Life. This ruler, Vladimir the Great, spared no expense, giving the task to the most qualified in his kingdom. Such a good thing is rarely done for so many by one man of mortal means. After traveling the entire known world these duty bound specialists returned with this account; that they had been to something so astonishing, so extraordinary and so wondrous that they did not know if they had been in heaven or on earth. They had encountered precisely that, heaven on earth. This was at Constantinople, the New Rome, Byzantium to some.

Sadly the New Rome fell to the mongoloid muslims and Russia was then accepted as being the Third Rome, a forth there never shall be. There has not been another faithful Christian believing empire on earth since Holy Russia. In the 17th century the wicked Russian patriarch Nikon and the rather new Romanov dynasty began contradicting the good teachings of the Lord. Peter the Great, in his love affair with Western Europe, continued the spiral downwards. The good people of Russia who took courage and held strong to the established Faith were more valiant than we can even imagine. This precious little flock of the pure Old Slavonic speaking people are now scattered all around this world. They called themselves Staro-obriatsi, or Keepers of the Old Rites, the term is sometimes translated Old Believers. The Old Believers are also known in Russian as zavolzhskie startsy. None of the Nikonian Latin reforms were accepted by the faithful and strict Old Believers.

The state church called the Old Believers schismatic, but as the Old Believers were the ones to keep the faith unchanged it is actually the other way around. How sad things are, the Holy Russian Empire consequently died the miserable death of antichrist ecumenism, satanic freemasonry and atheistic communism, losing Orthodoxy and falling into the Great Apostasy the remainder of the earthly impostor churches. The gross Nikonian practices have led to this state of affairs. Many of those who claim to be Old Believers, who had for centuries and generations accepted the temporary priestless existence, have now gone to modern minded false orthodoxy for fake priesthood. This new orthodoxy has been a lie since it started. What a terrible time to now accept this style of impostor orthodoxy, it is worse than ever. The faith and practices of the traditional Old Believers is nearly being destroyed and their way of life is all but extinct because of the threat of modern ideals.

Today capitalism, commercialism, modern democracy, industrialization and overall moderation spiritually distract us from what is right. Humanity, generally speaking, is very unable to understand what it is missing. The times we are in have affected the very last remaining expression of the true good old days. We should not be so surprised, for the Lord explained that when He returns there will be no Faith to speak of. That it would be like the days of Noah, when one man and his family were the only ones to rise above the destruction. And it will be better for Sodom and Gomorrah than for those in the end, for lonely Lot lost his wife to worldly pride. And don't forget the many other examples which speak so loudly, such that even the deaf could hear, should they care enough to bother to be keeping on always seeking what is right.

Ten years ago I heard of the Old Believers and I continue a dedicated and thoughtful study. Any input would be appreciated, for I do not know everything. I will do what I can to place references to this topic for other interested parties. Below are links to pages with further information.

I lean toward those of the more strict and traditional “priestless” Old Believers. I might also add that the term “priestless” is a misnomer and is not fair for people to be using. It is said by many that this persecuted group rejects the priesthood. Nothing could be further from the truth. All their clergy were murdered by the Nikonian Russian Orthodox state church. The good family of traditional Old Believers earnestly wants and hopes for a good option to the condition this world finds itself in now. In a short time this might be rectified. Taking on a false priesthood, as some have done, is only more corruption. Grace does not cease to exist even in a world like we are in. In the ancient Church the laity were understood as being part of the Royal Priesthood of all believers, they would baptize those who were worthy, if they were far from a priest. The final priestly duties would be fulfilled later, at whatever time the opportunity might arrive. Those who found themselves baptized in such a way would not be thought of as any less Christian. Those who would die in faith without baptism, say as martyrs, are explained as having had a baptism in their own blood, their desire having made them worthy (Axios). Here is something else I found along these lines:

If someone is preparing for Baptism, or is favorably disposed in this way, and if there is danger of their dying before he/she can be baptized, any lay man or woman “has the right, and indeed the duty, to perform the rite by thrice repeated immersion, or even by aspersion, or by pouring of water on the bed, with the words, ‘the servant (or handmaiden) of God (name) is baptized in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, now and ever and to the ages of ages. Amen.’ Such a baptism is entirely valid, as far as it goes. Later on, the priest does not repeat the rite, but only completes it by saying the omitted prayers and performing the omitted rites, then enters it into the church register.”

(From – A Manual of the Orthodox Church's Divine Services)

I see the traditional Old Believer stand, those who continue in the strict and straight way, as properly retaining the authentic Faith. God is more than able to complete and fulfill anything that might be lacking in them.

 

I also have made some pages about Old Belief  Distinct Points of Faith

 

General Information Links

 

There are other significant aspects that need to be noted as well. The modern Orthodox churches have now concluded that Old Belief was, and is now, right and correct. The Old Believers cannot be schismatic if they were only doing what has always been done by faithful Christian people from the beginning. The only way to maintain the Faith is to be keeping the Faith that always has been. The modern Orthodox continues giving up the Faith once for all given to mankind for Life. After Nikon did the work of the state, and was deposed for it, there were even more ruthless characters that replaced him. Actually, some of the Nikonite reformers were so confused that in their efforts to be aligned with the apostate Greeks they actually missed the mark completely, creating something conforming to nothing. Something else to understand is that the Old Believers do hold contempt towards the late Czardom of Russia but still honor the good old tradition of the Greeks from where Russia first received the Faith. A small group of Old Believers accepted clerical priesthood from Greeks when they moved into their sphere. These Old Believers became just “another rite” to the Greeks. As this situation of living with the Greeks was while under Turkish rule it would be safe to say that it was done under threat of death and that these Old Believers were weak in the Faith.

Source: http://mymartyrdom.com/old.htm

[Ebor]

the mongoloid muslims

"mongoloid"?  <insert emoticon of one raised eyebrow here>  What does that word mean *to you* and what historical texts have you read that used it please?

None of the Nikonian Latin reforms 

"Latin" reforms?  Yet in some of your earlier rants they were described as "greek". On what do you base calling them Latin please?

And just for the record, the way that Nikon acted was harsh and (in this person's opinion wrong), but I don't see much difference in how you are declaring that there is Only One Right Way(tm).

Ten years ago I heard of the Old Believers and I continue a dedicated and thoughtful study. Any input would be appreciated, for I do not know everything. I will do what I can to place references to this topic for other interested parties. Below are links to pages with further information.

I lean toward those of the more strict and traditional “priestless” Old Believers.

Do you actually belong to a parish?  Participate in weekly services with others?

There are other significant aspects that need to be noted as well. The modern Orthodox churches have now concluded that Old Belief was, and is now, right and correct.

Which EO churches? citations please?  And is it the praxis that is considered right?  In what way was *belief* in the basic doctines different as opposed to *praxis*? 


Ebor

[Αριστοκλής]

Trolls don't answer, Ebor.

[Asteriktos]

I see the traditional Old Believer stand, those who continue in the strict and straight way, as properly retaining the authentic Faith. God is more than able to complete and fulfill anything that might be lacking in them.

So, essentially, you don't actually need the Church, since God will guide you correctly if you just stay faithful to him. In other words, Protestantism is justified within your ultra-(un)traditional world view. Interesting.

[Ebor]

Trolls don't answer, Ebor.

That has become very clear.  The reason I wrote what I did, was for any lurkers to offer questions.

Ebor

[PeterTheAleut]

Viewing the web site to which Fatman linked us (www.mymartyrdom.com), I noticed some things about the strict Old Ritualist group to which the site author, John Alden, belongs that should trouble most evangelically-minded Orthodox.  Let me point out some quotes from this site.

From the site's home page:

Scripture cannot be translated into unholy language like English or modern Russian, so we should not make much of the “Scripture” quotations found here.

From http://mymartyrdom.com/v.htm

Language

What a wondrous gift Russia was given in that old Inspired language of the Church. They were given something very rare, an opportunity to learn from as pure a source as there ever was, the pure Church language given specifically to them by God. The validity of this language is unquestionable. Now the world has almost lost this most unique and beautiful expression of the Faith. Nikon changed the spelling of Jesus putting into oblivion the good memory of the proper spelling. The pure old Slavonic word for Jesus is very close to the ancient Arabic “issa” so there is precedence for the old Russian practice. In the Eastern Syriac language the name is spelled similarly to the pure old Slavonic as “ishou”, and it is not wise to overlook any of these. I do believe that the apostles and even the Lord Himself spoke like this. It is only false fear that would cause anyone to change the good established way.

“Everyone is aware of Nikon’s substitution of Iisus for the pure word Isus (Jesus) and of Nikolai for Nikola (Nicholas). “in the shadow of Antichrist” David Scheffel, page 139.

The one known as Theophan the Recluse was chastised by his bishops for attempting to translate liturgical language into the conversational use, so even heretics know something about this.

The traditional missionary practice of the Orthodox Church has always been to preach the Gospel and translate the Scriptures and service books into the languages of the indigenous people to whom we preach so that they can understand and participate.  During the missionary work of Ss. Cyril and Methodius and, later, Prince St. Vladimir (whose memory we commemorate tomorrow in the New Calendar churches) Slavonic was the native language of the Russian people.  But as time progressed, the Slavonic language in Russia evolved into modern Russian--languages do this.  Now most Russians don't understand Slavonic except for what they might hear in church; they certainly don't speak this tongue in their daily relations, AFAIK.  Does not our traditional focus on making the Scriptures and service books understandable to the average churchman require, then, that we continue to update the language used in these sacred books to reflect the idioms of the current vernacular?  IMO, the Orthodox should be very uncomfortable with any sentiment that venerates an ancient language as divinely inspired, considers the modern language vulgar and unfit for sacred use, and thus refuses to update its church language.  (The strictest Old Ritualist adherence to Old Slavonic also strikes me as quite phyletistic in its Russian nationalism, but I guess that's more properly the subject of another post.)

[dantxny]

The traditional missionary practice of the Orthodox Church has always been to preach the Gospel and translate the Scriptures and service books into the languages of the indigenous people to whom we preach so that they can understand and participate.  During the missionary work of Ss. Cyril and Methodius and, later, Prince St. Vladimir (whose memory we commemorate tomorrow in the New Calendar churches) Slavonic was the native language of the Russian people.  But as time progressed, the Slavonic language in Russia evolved into modern Russian--languages do this.  Now most Russians don't understand Slavonic except for what they might hear in church; they certainly don't speak this tongue in their daily relations, AFAIK.  Does not our traditional focus on making the Scriptures and service books understandable to the average churchman require, then, that we continue to update the language used in these sacred books to reflect the idioms of the current vernacular?  IMO, the Orthodox should be very uncomfortable with any sentiment that venerates an ancient language as divinely inspired, considers the modern language vulgar and unfit for sacred use, and thus refuses to update its church language.  (The strictest Old Ritualist adherence to Old Slavonic also strikes me as quite phyletistic in its Russian nationalism, but I guess that's more properly the subject of another post.)

Actually, I have met several Old Believers here in America who actually suggest traditional English for Liturgy as it wouldn't make sense for one to use a foreign language.  One has to remember that the Old Believers are not a homogenius group, even those similar and many in fact considered Old Believers are not.  Also, Mr Alderman and fatman were neither raised in the Old Believer sects and I suspect that neither have much contact with them either.  Thus, take their word with a grain of salt.

[fatman2021]

I have found a good OrthodoxWiki article about Old Believers.
http://orthodoxwiki.org/Old_Believers Old Believers
READ ALL

[Heorhij]

Is it just me, or has fatman2021 posted a link to the Wikipedia article that does not yet exist (has not yet been written)? That's what my screen says...

[Tallitot]

fatman, i see that OrthodoxForum (orthodoxforum .com/ ) is also receiving the benifit of your guidance.
Here are 2 more places you can go bite a bandwith-sandwich:

byzcath. org/ *

monachos. net/library/Main_Page **

not an Orthodox site (according to you no one is really Orthodox) but you outta sign up on RosaryArmy .com just we can start a pool on how many minutes it would be before you're banned.

* there are lots of Latin and Eastern Rite Catholics there you can berate 

**these folks really know thier stuff on there...you'll get a virtual whuppin', but in a nice oh so polite British Eaton_Oxford way

[fatman2021]

fatman, i see that OrthodoxForum (orthodoxforum .com/ ) is also receiving the benifit of your guidance.
Here are 2 more places you can go bite a bandwith-sandwich:

byzcath. org/ *

monachos. net/library/Main_Page **

not an Orthodox site (according to you no one is really Orthodox) but you outta sign up on RosaryArmy .com just we can start a pool on how many minutes it would be before you're banned.

* there are lots of Latin and Eastern Rite Catholics there you can berate 

**these folks really know thier stuff on there...you'll get a virtual whuppin', but in a nice oh so polite British Eaton_Oxford way

Your On...

[Deacon Lance]

Crucifer,

Thank you so much for recommending us.

Anyone want odds on how long he takes to get himself banned?

Fr. Deacon Lance

[John of the North]

Is it just me, or has fatman2021 posted a link to the Wikipedia article that does not yet exist (has not yet been written)? That's what my screen says...

No, the article exists. fatman just neglected to learn how to properly insert a link into a post. Understandable, he is busy alienating every member of this forum.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Believers

By the way, nothing is more effective at convincing me of a person's intellect and firm academic approach than their weak grasp of basic English grammar. Not.

[Entscheidungsproblem]

By the way, nothing is more effective at convincing me of a person's intellect and firm academic approach than their weak grasp of basic English grammar. Not.

[PeterTheAleut]

Connecting some statements from the Wikipedia article to some research I've done for this thread:

Modern readers may perceive these alterations as trivial, but the faithful of that time saw rituals and dogmas as strongly interconnected: church rituals had from the very beginning represented and symbolised doctrinal truth.

The circumstance that the church reforms of Nikon concerned 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 Believer's point of view, the idea of contents a priori prevailing over form appears simplistic. To illustrate their response, consider 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 do not just form two separable, autonomous entities, but connect with each other through complex relationships, 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 their very beginning have had a connection with doctrinal truth, changing these rituals can have a tremendous effect on religious conscience and a severe impact on the faithful.

I wonder how much the conflict that led to the Old Believers' schism is really grounded in the dispute between the Possessors and the Non-Possessors of the previous century.  The Possessors, following after St. Joseph, advanced quite strongly the Russian nationalist Third Rome doctrine and emphasized a life of prayer that was very communal and guided by strict rules and discipline.  In contrast, St. Nilus and his Non-Possessors preached that the Church must maintain some level of detachment from the affairs of the state and advocated the inner and personal relationship with Christ in mystical prayer.  The Possessors won the majority of the Russian hierarchy and suppressed the ideas of the Non-Possessors, thus making St. Joseph very influential on Russian life in the next (17th) century.  One can see St. Joseph's influence in the Old Ritualist emphasis on strict rules governing the external form of worship and in the Old Ritualist opposition to all things coming from the "apostate" Greeks.

[BrotherAidan]

I think there are personality types that become fundamentalist protestants, hard core latin rite RC's and the type of old believer that fatman expresses (also some Orthodox traditionalists)
I think the religion is just what happens to be there for that personality to use to beat up on others.

[Hopeful Faithful]

Greetings OrthodoxChristianity.net, I am from San Diego, California

I noticed a thread from here was referencing my website, so I thought it might be good to make some comments. I am at an introductory level to the strict Old Believers from Russia known as the Pomorsky.  I appreciate this opportunity to express a few things about matters of Faith, as matters of Faith matter more to me than anything else. The few people today that have heard about Old Believers drastically misunderstand the position they take. The Internet is truly not the best forum for straightening out all the issues, but perhaps one or two people might begin to have a better grasp of issues if we can go over them.

Anyone can test and prove things well enough to find the truth. If people care to know specific sources of mine I will be glad to work at offering them. Several things should be understood from the start. The English language was always forbidden by the early Christians to use in prayer, worship or scripture, because it is a tradition of men made by witches. English simply does not have the tools to properly express the things of God. Man generated electricity is strange fire like the strange incense warned against by the prophets of old. Petroleum products, like plastics, synthetic clothing and man made chemicals are the remains of the damned dead people, plants and animals from things like the flood and Korah, etc. They are black and stink, spiritually defiling and ungodly. It is the demons that carry the data/voices back and forth between computers/telephones. It is the demons who inspired people to use such things because they will ultimately be part of what is known as the Mark of the Beast. These things are simply not Christian.

Having said that it must be understood that we all must start somewhere. Truly, Pandora’s box has been opened, so I for one intend to use all at my disposal, to use the wickedness all around me against itself. At least until I find a way of escape or find a truly safe spiritual harbor from which to live. So, in the meantime I will use such things as are compromising, simply because we are all presently in this compromise to begin with. The most loving thing there is would be for those that find a glimmer of hope in such times as these to offer it to all those around them. As it is said of the Church Fathers, “silence of consent” so how can anyone keep quite with such wickedness all around us? For me the following words from the “English” Gospels by Christ are loud and clear, “They who are offended by Him will be sifted; but whom He shall judge they will be utterly destroyed”. Matt. 21:44 Better to be offended now than judged later! Computers are metal that thinks, something which is unnatural and dangerous, so beware.

The good Old Russian Faith is something worthy of discussion on any forum, sadly few recognize this fact. The reason for this is that it is now the only currency in the economy of salvation, a point which should matter to everyone on earth. For those that think that hydrogen cars are the solution to our problems, I would say think again, as they too use much wicked petroleum.

We all make our choices, as for me I want to simply learn how to obey God. I have found the strict Old Believers to be the last Christians and worthy of following their good example. It should be clarified that the “Official Russian Church” are those who departed the established Christian Faith, not the Old Believers. How can the Old Believers have caused any schism if all they are doing is keeping that authentic Faith which was originally given to them?

The rest of the “Orthodox world” at the time of Nikon had long gone into the Great Apostasy with the Latin’s. What Nikon did succeed to Latinize the Russian Church in many and various areas doctrine and practice. Faith and practice cannot be separated, as much as the some would like us to think. So the truth is that Nikon made the schism, not the Old Believers.


The last person with an original idea was Adam, and that was a bad one. People today wrap themselves up so much that they miss the forest for the trees. So all this witchery about plagiarism is really just that, witchery. Thinking that a person must be original is somebody else’s delusion. As for me, my only desire is to be having the opinion God has given us all to be having. May all our words be only that which might convey godliness to others. Such things are what make this life paradoxical and oxymoronic, in our blind eyes. The jurisdictional issue is something really of the past, today the only jurisdiction that matters is the jurisdiction of God.

The most unloving thing of all is to practice that which is departing from the established faith. These can be seen in the innovations with the sign of the cross, the transvestites and cross dressers (men that cut their beard, women that wear pants), being in communion with the Latin’s for centuries as the impostor Orthodox Churches have truly been in, the shortening of worship services, the Latinizing of books and languages, the contrariness of Processions, corruption of iconography…the list goes on and on. There are not different ways to heaven, as the Nikonites suppose. The two-fingered sign of the cross is specifically the early Christian way and not only the Old Believer way, the Greeks passed it on to the Russians from the start.

For instance, the two finger sign of the cross is not imagination, rationalization or innovation; but the three finger sign and the neo-orthodox priestly blessing all started by the influence of the Latin Crusaders when they sacked Constantinople. We can clearly see where it all started. There were other heresies which began at this time, such as God the Father icons and Augustinianism (calling Augustine holy). People who do not have a right hand wherewith to sign themselves are simply not expected to be signing themselves. God is more than able to complete that which we are unable to do ourselves in this temporary life. What is clear is that we do not have the privilege to contradict the established teachings of the true Faith.

Some people have an erroneous idea that all the redemptive acts (particularly the Crucifixion of Christ) cannot be remembered. I tell you the truth, that all the redemptive acts of God will be eternally remembered. So it has always been correct, from the beginning of Christianity, to sign oneself placing the two natures of Christ on the Holy Cross for our protection against the evils in this world. As a matter of fact it is heresy to place the Trinity on the sign of the cross, as heretics do.

Hyper-ritualism is that which those in the Great Apostasy are currently doing, the neo-Orthodox with their Latinizations and all others who pervert the truth. It is clear that heretics have no Grace, but nobody has ever shown me where the strict Old Believers practiced any heresy. There is only one conclusion a person can make. Obedience to godly examples is life, contradictions of God caused death. Godly ordered things are not at all mechanical but they certainly are precise in nature, though at times they are mysterious. But satan has always given impostors, also called magic. Woe to all those who mistake one for the other, there are no excuses to remain in errors. Heretics separate themselves from Christ and the Mysteries.

It is a misnomer that the strict Old Believers were ever separated from the Mysteries. They have never lacked anything. The neo-orthodox are not the Church. To follow the neo-orthodox in their innovative Latin practices is ludicrous. I would never desire such for my worst enemy. Heresy is contradicting Christ, His Apostles and the teaching of the Holy Spirit through the good councils. Even the Nikonites recognized they were wrong to call the Stoglav a forgery, but the Council of 1666 is unquestionably a robber council. It is significant that the 1666 council was not one year earlier or one year later. One contradiction with the robber council is that they began accepting the sprinkle baptisms of Latin converts. It is not the earthly end of a practice but the contradiction of established faith and practice that is Heresy.

By nature humans are forgetful, so by the mercies of God He repeats Himself often, and hears those who repeatedly entreat Him. So we should not be so critical of good repetitions. I am really amazed at the comments I see on this forum. The form of the blessing cross and the personal sign of the cross were identical through the ages, this age of Great Apostasy is certainly no time to be creating our own ideas about how blessings and personal gestures should be done. All the Greek Orthodox clergy that I have seen, which are hundreds, all bless according to the neo-orthodox Latin heretical fashion, not the good old way. And for the record, Old Believers most certainly are offended at the western Protestant ideas, so it is not honest to relate Protestants to Old Believers.

Avvakum, one of the greatest of Old Russian writers, was a most amazing clergy person, who never joined the Nikonite heretics. He continues to be a great example of the Orthodoxy that neo-orthodox have lost. People should learn more about him. When people express the old Christian form of the sign of the cross as 5 fingers is simply a way of expressing the fullness of Orthodoxy, compared to what is lacking in the neo-orthodox practice. Expressing false teachers as wolves in sheep clothing comes from the greatest example, Christ Himself. So, to think of the devil as a wolf is most appropriate indeed. Imitating Christ is not being a robot, but imitating the devil is unquestionably the worst thing anybody could do. The purpose of the devil is to have everything to do with everything, so that he can confuse everyone. Do not underestimate the devil, thinking that he would not impersonate his own demise, for that is exactly what he has always done from the beginning. Faith and practice cannot be separated, we cannot be imitators of heretics and be faithful to Christ at the same time. This is why doing the sign of the cross correctly is of such importance.

The reasons why I desire to be like the last good Christians, the strict Old Believers, is simply because I want to obey God. It is more than evident that they are the last good example of the one and only Faith which God gave the human race for salvation. The Old Believers have themselves given more than ample good reasons and I do not think myself greater than them, I bow to their good example and offer them to anyone who would care enough to really look. Maintaining the Faith given once for all mankind is not attaching anything, to the contrary, the Nikonites attach a multitude of things, just look and see for yourself. Actions speak louder than words. What people do, as far as placing the Trinity on the Cross, is louder than their denials of it. So Nikonite heretics can deny that they continually practice the heresy of putting the Trinity on the Cross,  but in all honestly they are two faced, for what they do betrays them. The Nikonite motives are impious and lazy, to say the least. The very substance of the Faith stands or falls on what might seem like the smallest of points. If we do everything right, yet faith in one thing, we are guilty of doing everything wrong.  A half truth is an entire lie. Repentance is Life and anyone can be doers of this. This is why the heretics have no excuse for continuing the way they do. Differences are acceptable only if they do not contradict the truth.

Heresy is not genuinely beautiful, even if it might seem so for a moment. It is sin through and through. Sin is sin, heresy is heresy. False ecumenism is when any heresy is accepted. There is really not any simpler way to say it. Bathing has been known a pagan custom which we would do well to avoid. Washing to get clean is another thing all together. I am guessing that many people do not understand things, but they should. To usurp God with devilish traditions of men like pharmaceuticals is unthinkable. God gives, God takes away. By no means should anyone, especially women, be going to beaches to sun bathe and strut around half naked, etc. God’s people perish due to lack of knowledge.

The Church of the Nativity in Erie, Pa. (and other similar kinds of “old believers”) are to be understood as “unionists” that have compromised their good roots. Due to such tendencies the earth swallowed hundreds of their family and neighbors. We should all take to heart such warnings. But there most certainly is room for anyone to come to a whole hearted repentance, but they will be the few who are willing to depart from the Great Apostasy.

This is a crazy mixed-up time when most people think that heretics are nice while at the same time ignore any hint of genuine goodness. There are degrees, those who more closely mimic the truth will endure more weeping and gnashing of teeth due to the fact that they should have known all the much more. For my part I cannot imagine how anything would persuade me to rejoin the desperately counterfeit neo-orthodoxies of my past. The delusion is certainly very great for so many to be in such confusions.

Everyone gets at least a couple things right which shows that there are no excuses for not getting the rest of the Faith right. All of us should understand that even  the holy Apostle Paul used the pagan idea of an “unknown god” to spark and awareness of the truth. There is no problem in using the right things that those in error do realize, so that they might come to the knowledge of the truth. Being all things to all people, as it were. But we should not take this too far, thinking that the last few people should risk what little example they have in order convince this unwilling last generation of unfaithful people to be faithful. btw,  the strict Old Believers already gave a thorough anathema and response to the Nikonite and neo-orthodox centuries ago, in what is known as the “Pomorsky Answers” which to this day there has never been a thoughtful rebuttal, simply because there is nothing good that the heretics could say. That document is one of the best documents I can think of, one which I suggest all people of goodwill learn. It is certainly part of the one standard of God to use all available references against the tide of wickedness.

The worst of trolls are those who parade as being Orthodox but are still light years away from ever having it. Being banned from talking to a group of heretics is a good thing, after all, just how long should we continue with them? In the end God will judge us, on that fearful day who of us is proud enough to say they will remain standing? I am the worlds worst speller, typist, reader and writer, but I trust that you all can get my points. I suggest that all Internet forums are trolls themselves. Who caught who here? The vast multitudes of people today will never be convinced of the truth because they are all happy in their various heresies. The only reason I continue to offer such study notes is because there are a few who actually appreciate it and care, perhaps even here. Something to take serious note of is that fake sacraments and fake altars make a fake church, better to be cautious about such things lest we find ourselves in a worse spot than we were before. To me, commitment to the original is what true love is all about. Chrysostom does not condemn those who reject the erroneous episcopacies of the last days for Chrysostom says concerning the Antichrist, “he will be seated in the temple of God, not that in Jerusalem only, but also in every Church.” Commentary on 2 Thess. 2:3,4. Chrysostom is not alone in expressing this view. When a good Christian is martyred they do not cease being a good Christian, likewise with the episcopacy, the fact the last ones were martyred in no way causes their faithful office to end. The eternal liturgy continues with all those who worship in Spirit and in Truth. Most people should find the truth believable but they simple refuse to, it is their choice.

About eating meat. In the Acts of the Sainted Apostles we can find a passage which says that all Christians must abstain from idolatry, blood and sexual immorality. So it goes that it is still required that good Christians “bleed” animals according to the command of God. Sadly, meat today, in our markets or restaurants, is most commonly electrocuted in order that all the blood remain inside the animal. Something to think about is that if we desire to obey God rather than men that we should not be eating such meat at all.

It does not take a rocket scientist or genius to see that compromising people like the Nikonites have caused all the confusion in this world. The Truth is never confusing. Those who have so long been in the confusion of this world may find the Truth confusing to them, it is no wonder. But the fact remains, error makes more error, confusion brings more confusion. Step back and think again and you might see things more clearly.

How are Nikonites and Latinizers not heretics?

How can there be any good earthly bishops during the age of this Great Apostasy?

This entire post is a response to the thread from here which has been referencing my website.

I am more than willing to talk to anyone, anytime.

Forgive, John

http://MyMartyrdom.com

(619) 243-6252

[Asteriktos]

The Truth is never confusing. Those who have so long been in the confusion of this world may find the Truth confusing to them, it is no wonder.

I'm confused...

However, I must say that I completely agree with what you said on your site: "manmade electricity is demonic". That is why I do not use the internet. How can good fruit come from a bad tree? (Matt. 7:17-18; Luke 6:43)

[PeterTheAleut]

I'm confused...

However, I must say that I completely agree with what you said on your site: "manmade electricity is demonic". That is why I do not use the internet. How can good fruit come from a bad tree? (Matt. 7:17-18; Luke 6:43)

Just don't do anything that gets you struck by "God's electricity".

[Elisha]

Interesting...just after Great Vespers this evening, our former Rector, Fr. Andrew Morby (visiting from MN w/ wife and daughter while on vacation) gave a great talk about a St. Theoleptus (sp?).  Some of the main talking points had to do with: 
1) being both right and wrong at the same time (like following the letter of the law but coming to the wrong conclusion).
2) schisms such as in the saint's day eventually healed after several decades (i.e. the Arsenian schism).
3) The saint was a contemporary of St. Gregory Palamas and had some of the same influences, but St. Theoleptus was much more pastoral in nature since he was the Metropolitan of a large flock.  Because of these areas, this third point stuck out for me:  Economia ALWAYS takes precedence over Akrivia in pastoral things.  This completely makes sense to me, as Economia deals with leniency and mercy - actually practicing love towards the flock as opposed to acting like a dictator by insisting in Akrivia all the time.

I think this is the major issue with Old Believers - they have completely lost site of trying to love their fellow Orthodox that they can only concentrate on the letter of the laws.

[PeterTheAleut]

Somehow, I don't think Hopeful Faithful (a.k.a. John Alden) truly represents Old Believer faith and praxis.  Some of his ideas seem quite extreme even compared to what little I know of Old Believer tradition.

[Ebor]

Anyone can test and prove things well enough to find the truth. If people care to know specific sources of mine I will be glad to work at offering them. Several things should be understood from the start. The English language was always forbidden by the early Christians to use in prayer, worship or scripture, because it is a tradition of men made by witches.

Indeed, one can look for facts and details of history and other fields to find out what is true.  And just for starters, what you write above is not true.  I would be most interested in knowing what "specific source" you have for the above assertion, because historically and linguistically it is wrong.

How can "English" have been "forbidden" by "Early Christians" when the English language did not exist in the first century AD? What time period is "Early" please?   What do you mean by "English" anyway, may one ask?

Old English or Anglo Saxon came first and is the language of "Beowulf" and the "Anglo-Saxon Chronicles" and Bede's "Ecclesiastical History of the English People". The Gospels were translated into it:
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Academy/4506/luke-ws.html
The Gospel of Luke in West Saxon

It was the language of Caedmon and his hymn.
http://www.heorot.dk/bede-caedmon.html 

The Lord's Prayer was translated into it.  It starts:
Fæder ure,
 þu þe eart on heofonum,
 si þin nama gehalgod.....
http://www.pastperfect.info/sites/yeavering/archive/prayer.html
http://www.sacred-texts.com/neu/ascp/a03_29.htm

I can provide more links and source materials to show that your statement on the language being forbidden is an error, it is not true.  I use Old English since that is the form of the language that would be closest to "early Christians".  Middle English came out of Old English and is the language of Chaucer and the Wycliffe translation of the Bible.  Moving on to Modern English, which has changed over the centuries, we have the King James Version of the Bible and much more.  That covers over 15 centuries of a language's history.

Would you be so good as to explain how an languge, any established language with centuries of use in a culture is a "tradition of men"?  And on what do you base the claim that it was "made by witches" please?  Are you a linguist?  A philologist?  On what authority do you make such a peculiar assertion about a language?

There is so much in your screed that would appear to be your own particular opinions without any support or authority beyond your say-so.  What are your sources then, please? for example this one:

Bathing has been known a pagan custom which we would do well to avoid.

Do you mean going swimming in a pool or lake or the sea?  On what do you base this claim?

To usurp God with devilish traditions of men like pharmaceuticals is unthinkable. God gives, God takes away.

The knowledge and ability to find cures or relief for human ills is "satanic" as opposed to God giving Humans the brains and talents to think things through, to find things that help people who are suffering?

The Church of the Nativity in Erie, Pa. (and other similar kinds of “old believers”) are to be understood as “unionists” that have compromised their good roots. Due to such tendencies the earth swallowed hundreds of their family and neighbors.

Or this one.  The "earth swallowed" hundreds of people? Where?  on what dates?  What documentation would you provide to support a claim of the ending of many human lives?

Forgive, John

And what is it that you wish to be forgiven *for* one wonders.

Since the claims about English are wrong, why should any of your other opinions be thought "True"? 

With respect,

Ebor

[Hopeful Faithful]

Somehow, I don't think Hopeful Faithful (a.k.a. John Alden) truly represents Old Believer faith and praxis.  Some of his ideas seem quite extreme even compared to what little I know of Old Believer tradition.

Greetings there PeterThe Aleut,

It would be nice if you could be specific, could you?

Forgive, John Alden

http://MyMartyrdom.com

(619) 243-6252

[Ebor]

Somehow, I don't think Hopeful Faithful (a.k.a. John Alden) truly represents Old Believer faith and praxis.  Some of his ideas seem quite extreme even compared to what little I know of Old Believer tradition.

Some time back I had read postings by a "John Alden" (assuming that they are the same person) on another EO board. It was similar to this, and iirc at that time he was not part of any Old Believer group.  One wonders if he is now.

Ebor

[Hopeful Faithful]

Just don't do anything that gets you struck by "God's electricity".

Greetings PeterTheAluet,

We would not even be here if it were not for "God's electricity" (no winking here).

Forgive, John

[Hopeful Faithful]

I think this is the major issue with Old Believers - they have completely lost site of trying to love their fellow Orthodox that they can only concentrate on the letter of the laws.

Greetings Elisha,

How is it loving to reject the law and accept Latin reforms and still believe that Orthodoxy exists therein?

If there was ever a good answer to this I might begin to believe that the Old Believers are the unloving ones.

Forgive, John

[Hopeful Faithful]

Indeed, one can look for facts and details of history and other fields to find out what is true.  And just for starters, what you write above is not true.  I would be most interested in knowing what "specific source" you have for the above assertion, because historically and linguistically it is wrong.

How can "English" have been "forbidden" by "Early Christians" when the English language did not exist in the first century AD? What time period is "Early" please?   What do you mean by "English" anyway, may one ask?

Old English or Anglo Saxon came first and is the language of "Beowulf" and the "Anglo-Saxon Chronicles" and Bede's "Ecclesiastical History of the English People". The Gospels were translated into it:
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Academy/4506/luke-ws.html
The Gospel of Luke in West Saxon

It was the language of Caedmon and his hymn.
http://www.heorot.dk/bede-caedmon.html 

The Lord's Prayer was translated into it.  It starts:
Fæder ure,
 þu þe eart on heofonum,
 si þin nama gehalgod.....
http://www.pastperfect.info/sites/yeavering/archive/prayer.html
http://www.sacred-texts.com/neu/ascp/a03_29.htm

I can provide more links and source materials to show that your statement on the language being forbidden is an error, it is not true.  I use Old English since that is the form of the language that would be closest to "early Christians".  Middle English came out of Old English and is the language of Chaucer and the Wycliffe translation of the Bible.  Moving on to Modern English, which has changed over the centuries, we have the King James Version of the Bible and much more.  That covers over 15 centuries of a language's history.

Would you be so good as to explain how an languge, any established language with centuries of use in a culture is a "tradition of men"?  And on what do you base the claim that it was "made by witches" please?  Are you a linguist?  A philologist?  On what authority do you make such a peculiar assertion about a language?

There is so much in your screed that would appear to be your own particular opinions without any support or authority beyond your say-so.  What are your sources then, please? for example this one:

Do you mean going swimming in a pool or lake or the sea?  On what do you base this claim?

The knowledge and ability to find cures or relief for human ills is "satanic" as opposed to God giving Humans the brains and talents to think things through, to find things that help people who are suffering?

Or this one.  The "earth swallowed" hundreds of people? Where?  on what dates?  What documentation would you provide to support a claim of the ending of many human lives?

And what is it that you wish to be forgiven *for* one wonders.

Since the claims about English are wrong, why should any of your other opinions be thought "True"? 

With respect,

Ebor

Greetings Ebor,

By English I mean that tradition of men made first by witches and which continues today in this language we are currently using. When I speak of early I mean those from the time when the roots of English began, that is early enough for me to call it early Christianity. Your references to "Beowulf" and the "Anglo-Saxon Chronicles" and Bede's "Ecclesiastical History of the English People" do not reference any good authority in Church use. Bede was condemned by his bishop so I do not accept references to such things as being of good source. I know that there have been many heretical translations, as you show, but they are not one of them is of good Christian authority. It is not true that Old English was ever of a good Christian source. How can a language of witches be Christian? The fact that Old English is a tradition of men made by witches is undeniable. I have never seen one good Christian reference that ever accepted it as a sacred language. I will get three references to the fact that English is a tradition of men made by witches, give me a little time to look them up. I will indeed explain in detail about all these things, but it will take time for me to put it together. It should be noted that Wycliffe and King James were both manifest heretics, so I do not recognize them as any authority. We all make our choices though. I have studied language for 20years, at seminary level. Everyone should make themselves aware of the truth, it is all our personal responsibility. Being born into this world gives all of us this authority, which nobody can take away. I would argue the same thing about opinions here, it is clear where most of the opinions come from. Let us all reconsider these things more than ever and be keeping only the opinion of God. The good old Christian attitude toward "bathing" is recorded more than well enough, but I will work to offer a few refrences about it as well. I have referenced the flood and Korah as two references where the earth swallowed people. The facts about English have not been shown wrong. As far as being forgiven, we all offend, we all have need of forgiveness.

Forgive, John

[Veniamin]

The "facts" about English have not been proven wrong?  Sorry, bub, but that dog just ain't gonna hunt.  If you want to make an assertion that flies against consensus, you have to provide evidence for it.  You don't get to throw something unsubstantiated out there and say that it's true until we prove otherwise. 

[Anastasios]

Greek was a language of pagans and Slavonic was the language of people who worshipped trees among other things. So, whence the idea that these are holy languages?

[Asteriktos]

How is it that the Old Believers are so pure? If I were to use your methodology, I could just as easily argue that the Old Believers were heretics. The Orthodox who brought the Russians into the Eastern Church were in communion with Rome (on and off) for generations (from the 9th to 11th centuries), even after Rome had accepted the filioque, had declared that anti-Photian robber council to be Ecumenical, had openly declared the heresy of papal supremacy, and so forth. Therefore, all of Orthodoxy was fallen by the time Russia became Christian via the Eastern Church. Thus, the Old Believers were merely a break off of a group (Russians) that had never in their history been a true Church, because they were originally guided and formed by a latin-loving Eastern Orthodox world (Constantinople, etc.).

[Ebor]

By English I mean that tradition of men made first by witches

As opposed to English the language that come from Indo-European through the Germanic branch?  I'm sorry, your "definitions" of things seem to be ideosyncratic and unexplained.  What do *you* mean by "witches" and what is their time period and location please?

When I speak of early I mean those from the time when the roots of English began, that is early enough for me to call it early Christianity.

Is it then somewhere around the 4th century AD with St. Patrick being born to Romano-British Christian parents?  Or do you mean earlier when St. Alban became the proto-martyr of the British Isles?  Or some other period.  Please be more specific as to your meanings and definitions.

Your references to "Beowulf" and the "Anglo-Saxon Chronicles" and Bede's "Ecclesiastical History of the English People" do not reference any good authority in Church use.

"Beowulf" is literature with Christian elements.  The "Anglo-Saxon Chronicle" is a primary source historical document.  And Bede's "Ecclesiastical History" is also an historical work that has a great focus on matters of English Christians. They are how we know what was happening in early Christian England.  Have you read any of these works and understood them?

Bede was condemned by his bishop so I do not accept references to such things as being of good source.

Condemned for what?  Which bishop?  What references do you have for this?  I provide links and I can give titles of books as well.  I beg your pardon, but that you do not 'accept' those references does not have any affect on the fact that they are examples of the language called Old English/Anglo-Saxon.  You have provided no references for your assertions at all. 

I know that there have been many heretical translations, as you show, but they are not one of them is of good Christian authority.

Not "good Christian authority"?  Because you say so?  Who are you to declare them heretical?  They were made long before the Great Schism of 1054, if one wishes to use that date for a marker.  They certainly were not speaking any form of Russian in Anglo-Saxon England or in Ireland or Scotland or Wales at that time.  They are what Anglo-Saxon Christians used in their own tongue. 

It is not true that Old English was ever of a good Christian source.

And your proof or documentation of this would be?  Merely repeating the same lines about 'traditions of men' is not proof nor support for your argument.

I have never seen one good Christian reference that ever accepted it as a sacred language.

And is your definition of a 'good Christian reference' one that agrees with your particular ideas?    You believe in 'sacred languages'?  Since God has caused all things to come into being including languages and human intelligence to use and develope them, it is possible that all languages are on a common footing in that regard.

I will get three references to the fact that English is a tradition of men made by witches, give me a little time to look them up. I will indeed explain in detail about all these things, but it will take time for me to put it together.

May one suggest that for future 'fiats' it would be useful for you to have your documentation available to support your opinions?  Please do provide some references, and would you please also define what the words mean to you, since they seem to have some connotations that are not shared by other people?  Thank you in advance.

It should be noted that Wycliffe and King James were both manifest heretics, so I do not recognize them as any authority.

I offered them as markers in the history of the developement of the English Language, nothing more.  Sometimes having an historical reference point is helpful in understanding ideas and history.

We all make our choices though. I have studied language for 20years, at seminary level.

May one ask what seminary(ies) you have been associated with for these studies please?  What languages have you studied?  I'm sorry, but claiming to study for 20 years does not mean that expertise has been attained.  So far you have not offered any support that would lead me to accept you as any kind of authority.

Everyone should make themselves aware of the truth, it is all our personal responsibility.

Sometimes what is true and what a person likes or believes are not the same thing.

Being born into this world gives all of us this authority,

I begin to wonder if you have a different definition of 'authority'...

it is clear where most of the opinions come from.

Human beings with ideas and likes and dislikes and the influences that make up their lives. 

Let us all reconsider these things more than ever and be keeping only the opinion of God.

So far you have not demonstrated that you are an authority on what God, The Creator of All Things, wants human beings to do, but have only put forth a lengthy and questionable essay on what you think things should be.

The good old Christian attitude toward "bathing" is recorded more than well enough, but I will work to offer a few refrences about it as well.

Again, please do, as well as defining what you mean by 'bathing'.  Tubs and hot water?  Sea bathing at the shore?  Swimming in a pool?

I have referenced the flood and Korah as two references where the earth swallowed people.

Since both the flood and Korah are long in the past from the people at the Old Believer parish in Erie, PA in 2007 these incidents do not apply to the people there today.  Yet you asserted that *those* people alive and worshipping in Pennsylvania have had 'hundreds' of relatives and neighbors 'swallowed up' and you have given no supporting data. There is no proof that your idea has any truth or reality.

The facts about English have not been shown wrong.

You have shown no "facts" about English at all. You have merely repeated your idea without any support or definitions of what you might mean.  When counter-evidence with documentation was offered to your assertions, you declared them 'heretical'.  You said that something did not exist, when in fact it did.  Your personal ideas are not the same as 'facts'.

Ebor

[Asteriktos]

Ebor,

You believe in 'sacred languages'?  Since God has caused all things to come into being including languages and human intelligence to use and develope them, it is possible that all languages are on a common footing in that regard.

Also, even supposing that you do believe in sacred languages, it was hardly strange throughout Church history for sacred things to be translated into vulgar tongues. Even John Chrysostom (horrors!) did this when he was exiled.

[recent convert]

Greetings Elisha,

How is it loving to reject the law and accept Latin reforms and still believe that Orthodoxy exists therein?

If there was ever a good answer to this I might begin to believe that the Old Believers are the unloving ones.

Forgive, John
Sure you can snow a peasant like me with endless sources of data for self justification cloaked in false humility but you are not one to determine who Jesus Christ will welcome into the kingdom of heaven. How does one not know that Satan may be using you as a self proclaimed pharisee to try to shut the doors of the kingdom of heaven to others? Perhaps you need to repent and try to live the simple commands of Jesus Christ of the golden rule and loving God and your neighbor as yourself. It is heresy to proclaim apocatastasis but it is permissable to pray for it. God does know a sinning grouch such as myself is unworthy but the struggle is to believe everyone else is.

[PeterTheAleut]

Misplaced "[/quote]" tag?

[Anastasios]

Hey man, if you want to live like an Old Believer, what is stopping you? Go up to one of their compounds, knock on the door, ask for baptism, and enjoy the rest of your life.

[Αριστοκλής]

Hey man, if you want to live like an Old Believer, what is stopping you? Go up to one of their compounds, knock on the door, ask for baptism, and enjoy the rest of your life.

Ouch!

[The young fogey]

Well, if 'Speak for yourself' John Alden wanted to parody self-destructive converts he seems to have done a wickedly thorough job with his site.

<- Never been to an Old Rite church but has the beautiful Old Rite ROCOR Prayer Book, now a classic, and knows and likes Slavonic. And knows somebody born and raised Priestless Old Believer, now ROCOR, who is perfectly normal.

[theodore]

Anyone can test and prove things well enough to find the truth. If people care to know specific sources of mine I will be glad to work at offering them. Several things should be understood from the start. The English language was always forbidden by the early Christians to use in prayer, worship or scripture, because it is a tradition of men made by witches. English simply does not have the tools to properly express the things of God. Man generated electricity is strange fire like the strange incense warned against by the prophets of old. Petroleum products, like plastics, synthetic clothing and man made chemicals are the remains of the damned dead people, plants and animals from things like the flood and Korah, etc. They are black and stink, spiritually defiling and ungodly. It is the demons that carry the data/voices back and forth between computers/telephones. It is the demons who inspired people to use such things because they will ultimately be part of what is known as the Mark of the Beast. These things are simply not Christian.

Prior to the Protestant Reformation, the language used by people on the British Isles (and all of Western Europe for that matter) was LATIN.  Perhaps the Roman Church made up stories about witches and so on to prevent the adoption of prayer in a language which the average person in England could actually understand.  Of course I have not heard of such stories, and you should provide references when making such novel claims.  To claim Slavonic is God's language reminds me of the Fundamentalist Protestants who claim that the only version of the Bible which is true is the King James Edition, ignoring the fact that the original was written in Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek.  If you're such a linguistic snob, why don't you adopt worship in a language which Christ actually spoke, such as Aramaic.  There are indeed Syrian Christians who still use that language.  You then claim that "English simply does not have the tools to properly express the things of God."  Of all the languages out there, English is among the most adaptable, borrowing words from a multiplicity of different sources and languages.  There are multiple ways of expressing the same thoughts in English, and if none suits you, you can certainly find some way to express a thought, or even borrow a foreign, say Greek word which is suitable.  That's why we Orthodox use the term Pascha rather than Easter.  See, that wasn't so difficult.  If you feel so strongly about English being a language of witches, then I sir, assert that since YOU are expressing yourself in this forum using the very language which you condemn, that YOU ARE A WITCH!!!  If you think that my last sentence is ridiculous, than you need to re-read your argument condemning liturgical English.

[Αριστοκλής]

Somehow I don't think the Scots, Welsh, Irish would agree with this totally.

[Ebor]

Somehow I don't think the Scots, Welsh, Irish would agree with this totally.

  I do believe that you are correct. 

Ebor

[Ebor]

Prior to the Protestant Reformation, the language used by people on the British Isles (and all of Western Europe for that matter) was LATIN. 

But there were still some things in the various local languages such as the links I posted on the gospels and the Lord's Prayer and others in Anglo-Saxon.

Of all the languages out there, English is among the most adaptable, borrowing words from a multiplicity of different sources and languages. 

Indeed.  I have read of a case of a business venture between a German company and one in a place that spoke a form of Chinese.  The common language was English.

Ebor

[Ebor]

Ebor,

Also, even supposing that you do believe in sacred languages, it was hardly strange throughout Church history for sacred things to be translated into vulgar tongues. Even John Chrysostom (horrors!) did this when he was exiled.

True.  It's not such a wild and evil idea, it seems to me, to teach people in the language that *they* know instead of making some kind of "inner ring" "special group" "only the ones who learn the One True Speech are accepted" thing.  It sounds kind of gnostic to me. 


And for the record, I don't believe that there is some kind of 'sacred language' for Christianity. 

Ebor

[PeterTheAleut]

A couple of online articles about Old Believers that I found very informative (Evidently, they're not as opposed to new-fangled technologies as Hopeful Faithful might like us to believe.  Just don't be caught with a cigarette in your mouth!):

Collection of Old Believer History and Tradition, compiled by Paul J. Wigowsky


Old Believers in Alaska, by Vitali Vitaliev

The first several paragraphs of this article lay down the foundation of the general Russian Orthodox presence in Alaska, so you won't find anything specific about the Old Believers until the paragraph I quote below.

One thing, however, is certain. Had Alaska stayed Russian and then Soviet, paradoxically, it would never have become home to the world's most obscure community of Russian outcasts. These are confined to a handful of small villages: Nikolaevsk, Voznesenka, Razdolna, Kachemak-Selo, Port Graham and Nanwalek - no more than 2 or 3 thousand people altogether - in the south-west of the Kenai Peninsula. Visitors are not welcome there, but I was lucky - my name must have helped.

Some paragraphs (emphases mine) from this article that I found quite enlightening within the context of this thread and Hopeful Faithful's English language thread:

The majority of Nikolaevsk residents came to Alaska in 1968 from Brazil, via Oregon, where they survived by growing wheat and corn. In the words of Father Kondratiy Fefelov, with whom I spoke inside the village church of St. Nicholas, they left Brazil because of its poverty - "We couldn't sell our crops" - and Oregon, in fear of the "corruptive influence" the American media, mainly television, could have on their children, traditionally brought up in strict accordance with the Old Believers' religious values. "We wanted to get away from Western civilisation, with all its drugs and sexes (sic), and to be on our own…"

"How come you allow this?" I asked him pointing at a satellite dish on the roof of a neighbouring house. The priest waved his hand nervously.

"We had to slacken up eventually. You ban television - and the kids run to our American neighbours, or go to the cinema, which is even more dissipating…" He pronounced "cinema" with disgust - in precisely the same way the Old Believers of Peter the Great times must have uttered the hated word "reform".

And yet, the feared Western civilisation has crept its way into this closed, anachronistic world.

"We have a problem with young Russian village guys who are in the habit of getting drunk and driving their pick-up trucks at breakneck speed across the town," a tourism official in Homer confided in me. When I asked the ‘Batiushka’ about it, he pretended he didn't hear the question. In a challenge to the age-long traditions of male domination, several Nikolaevsk women found themselves jobs in Homer, whereas a couple of others chose to leave the community altogether and moved into the "real world", where, as one Nikolaevsk resident told me with horror, "they wear shorts and even use make-up". On the other hand, three American families came to live in Nikolaevsk and seem to be getting along well with the Russians.

Yet even the most conformist of the Old Believers cannot dismiss all the fruits of Western civilisation as harmful. The Batiushka himself was telling me with pride about the villagers' own small fleet of ultra-modern fishing vessels, with latest electronic equipment - fishing constitutes their main source of income. Nikolaevsk boasts an excellent secondary school, one of the best in Alaska, where all the subjects, except for Russian, are taught in English. No wonder the village teenagers prefer communicating in English, although most of them retain a reasonably good command of their melodious old-fashioned Russian language. As for smaller kids, they hardly speak any Russian at all.

"They don't want to learn Russian," complained Nina Fefelova, at whose house I was put up for the night. Nina, herself an Old Believer, came to Nikolaevsk from the Russian Far East seven years ago and married one of ‘Batiushka's’ sons, a deacon called Denis. She taught Russian at the village school.

[Bono Vox]

Elder Cleopa of Romania had to deal with the Old Believers over there. He brought many of them back into the fold.

[PeterTheAleut]

Elder Cleopa of Romania had to deal with the Old Believers over there. He brought many of them back into the fold.

I'm interested to know how he did it.