Author Topic: Old believer info needed  (Read 2193 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline yeshuaisiam

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,695
  • A pulling horse cannot kick.
Old believer info needed
« on: January 03, 2014, 08:59:07 PM »
I've been researching the "Old Believer" Orthodox for a while now, and pretty intensely for the last week.  I'm trying to get more information about "what exactly happened" as to why the schism took place.

I'm having trouble understanding a few things.

First, was the tradition of the church the two finger cross up until the (nearly) the point of their schism?  If so why was the change needed?

Also with the procession what was the original tradition?  Clock wise or counter clock wise?   Why was that change needed?

Why were these things so important (the changes) that it caused splits in the church?   If Orthodox Christians were practicing traditional Orthodoxy and Orthodoxy "changed" yet these bishops felt they didn't need to change, how are these things worth a schism?
I learned how to be more frugal and save money at http://www.livingpress.com

Offline mike

  • A sexual pervert with limited English reading comprehension
  • Protostrator
  • ***************
  • Posts: 24,872
  • Polish Laser Jesus shooting down schismatics
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Diocese of Białystok and Gdańsk
Re: Old believer info needed
« Reply #1 on: January 03, 2014, 09:07:15 PM »
The changes were made to unite practices in Russia to those of the Ecumenical Patriarchate. The communication between these two was not good enough so they evolved differently.

Old believers hadn't had any bishops for 200 years until one bishop from sic! Bosnia joined them. For the first 200 years they had been supplied by renegade canonical priests.

I wonder how would you include in the religion you created because they all cared most for the stuff you despise (icons, liturgics to some level, "man-made traditions"). Good luck with that.
« Last Edit: January 03, 2014, 09:09:14 PM by Michał Kalina »
Hyperdox Herman, Eastern Orthodox Christian News - fb, Eastern Orthodox Christian News - tt

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? Who can watch the watchmen?
"No one is paying attention to your post reports"
Why do posters that claim to have me blocked keep sending me pms and responding to my posts? That makes no sense.

Offline Asteriktos

  • titular master of all I survey
  • Hypatos
  • *****************
  • Posts: 35,670
Re: Old believer info needed
« Reply #2 on: January 03, 2014, 09:12:06 PM »
I don't know a lot about the subject, but some thoughts fwiw...

First, was the tradition of the church the two finger cross up until the (nearly) the point of their schism?  If so why was the change needed?

I do not know the answer to this, but I do know that there was no single way of crossing yourself in the early Church. In fact, crossing yourself at all, as we think of it, may not have been in place in the early centuries. They may have simply done crosses on the forehead, or other practices, maybe have used them at different times that eventually became the norm, for different reasons, and so forth. The idea of the cross, crossing yourself, etc. was in place, but the way this manifested itself in practices has developed throughout Church history. Now whether things ever became standard, and then practices later changed again (e.g., with the old believers, or crossing left to right, or whatever), I don't know.

Quote
Why were these things so important (the changes) that it caused splits in the church?   If Orthodox Christians were practicing traditional Orthodoxy and Orthodoxy "changed" yet these bishops felt they didn't need to change, how are these things worth a schism?

Today this may be (and probably has been) framed as a Big-T vs. little-t thing, that this was a needless division over a custom or practice. It might be said that such customs can have significant practical importance, but not be mistaken for having dogmatic importance. Crossing yourself was made for man, not man for crossing yourself according to a specific method. I have also read briefly of a critique of the old believers saying that their division was caused by a rejection of community and an embrace of individual piety. According to this view they became essentially Russian Protestants, thinking themselves worthy to judge over the larger body, following whatever their individual consciences felt or believed, being obedient to self and disobedient to the Church of Christ. From this perspective, if the Church changes a custom (or introduces a new variation)--that is, if it really is the God acting through the Church--and you reject this change, then you are not clinging to tradition, but rather clinging to your own desires and habits and methods, and little better than the Jews (ie. followers of Judaism) in the first century who could not accept that God introduced changes to how things were to be done (or at least could be done). I am not saying that I agree or disagree with any of this, it's just what I've read.
« Last Edit: January 03, 2014, 09:14:19 PM by Asteriktos »
"The bed is too short to stretch out on, the blanket too narrow to wrap around you." (Isa. 28:20)

Offline xOrthodox4Christx

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,191
  • Faith: Orthodox Catholic Church
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: Old believer info needed
« Reply #3 on: January 03, 2014, 09:15:28 PM »
I've been researching the "Old Believer" Orthodox for a while now, and pretty intensely for the last week.  I'm trying to get more information about "what exactly happened" as to why the schism took place.

I'm having trouble understanding a few things.

First, was the tradition of the church the two finger cross up until the (nearly) the point of their schism?  If so why was the change needed?

Also with the procession what was the original tradition?  Clock wise or counter clock wise?   Why was that change needed?

Why were these things so important (the changes) that it caused splits in the church?   If Orthodox Christians were practicing traditional Orthodoxy and Orthodoxy "changed" yet these bishops felt they didn't need to change, how are these things worth a schism?

It's as Michal said. The original practice was closer to the modern one. It was Russia that went a bit too far away from that tradition. When the liturgical reforms began to help heal the differences between the Slavs and Greeks, the Old Believers believed that the Greek practice was wrong and schism.

This is based on my very low level of knowledge of the schism. There are a few OBs on the forum, maybe they can speak up.
« Last Edit: January 03, 2014, 09:16:28 PM by xOrthodox4Christx »
“There is your brother, naked, crying, and you stand there confused over the choice of an attractive floor covering.”- St. Ambrose of Milan

"Now one cannot be a half-hearted Christian, but only entirely or not at all." -Fr. Seraphim Rose

"He who does not love his brother whom he has seen cannot love God whom he has not seen." (1 John 4:20)

Offline yeshuaisiam

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,695
  • A pulling horse cannot kick.
Re: Old believer info needed
« Reply #4 on: January 03, 2014, 09:19:44 PM »
The changes were made to unite practices in Russia to those of the Ecumenical Patriarchate. The communication between these two was not good enough so they evolved differently.

Old believers hadn't had any bishops for 200 years until one bishop from sic! Bosnia joined them. For the first 200 years they had been supplied by renegade canonical priests.

I wonder how would you include in the religion you created because they all cared most for the stuff you despise (icons, liturgics to some level, "man-made traditions"). Good luck with that.

I'm just learning about them not agreeing with them.   Thank you for the information.
I learned how to be more frugal and save money at http://www.livingpress.com

Offline mike

  • A sexual pervert with limited English reading comprehension
  • Protostrator
  • ***************
  • Posts: 24,872
  • Polish Laser Jesus shooting down schismatics
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Diocese of Białystok and Gdańsk
Re: Old believer info needed
« Reply #5 on: January 03, 2014, 09:21:21 PM »
It's as Michal said. The original practice was closer to the modern one. It was Russia that went a bit too far away from that tradition. When the liturgical reforms began to help heal the differences between the Slavs and Greeks, the Old Believers believed that the Greek practice was wrong and schism.

I didn't say that.

I said the practices were different. Which one was older, "more traditional" or more "Orthodox" not really being important.

Quote
This is based on my very low level of knowledge of the schism. There are a few OBs on the forum, maybe they can speak up.

All but one "coverted" online and not having met real Old Believers to begin with.
Hyperdox Herman, Eastern Orthodox Christian News - fb, Eastern Orthodox Christian News - tt

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? Who can watch the watchmen?
"No one is paying attention to your post reports"
Why do posters that claim to have me blocked keep sending me pms and responding to my posts? That makes no sense.

Offline yeshuaisiam

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,695
  • A pulling horse cannot kick.
Re: Old believer info needed
« Reply #6 on: January 03, 2014, 09:30:21 PM »
I don't know a lot about the subject, but some thoughts fwiw...

First, was the tradition of the church the two finger cross up until the (nearly) the point of their schism?  If so why was the change needed?

I do not know the answer to this, but I do know that there was no single way of crossing yourself in the early Church. In fact, crossing yourself at all, as we think of it, may not have been in place in the early centuries. They may have simply done crosses on the forehead, or other practices, maybe have used them at different times that eventually became the norm, for different reasons, and so forth. The idea of the cross, crossing yourself, etc. was in place, but the way this manifested itself in practices has developed throughout Church history. Now whether things ever became standard, and then practices later changed again (e.g., with the old believers, or crossing left to right, or whatever), I don't know.

Quote
Why were these things so important (the changes) that it caused splits in the church?   If Orthodox Christians were practicing traditional Orthodoxy and Orthodoxy "changed" yet these bishops felt they didn't need to change, how are these things worth a schism?

Today this may be (and probably has been) framed as a Big-T vs. little-t thing, that this was a needless division over a custom or practice. It might be said that such customs can have significant practical importance, but not be mistaken for having dogmatic importance. Crossing yourself was made for man, not man for crossing yourself according to a specific method. I have also read briefly of a critique of the old believers saying that their division was caused by a rejection of community and an embrace of individual piety. According to this view they became essentially Russian Protestants, thinking themselves worthy to judge over the larger body, following whatever their individual consciences felt or believed, being obedient to self and disobedient to the Church of Christ. From this perspective, if the Church changes a custom (or introduces a new variation)--that is, if it really is the God acting through the Church--and you reject this change, then you are not clinging to tradition, but rather clinging to your own desires and habits and methods, and little better than the Jews (ie. followers of Judaism) in the first century who could not accept that God introduced changes to how things were to be done (or at least could be done). I am not saying that I agree or disagree with any of this, it's just what I've read.

Thank you for the information.   Yes, as I was looking the Big-T vs. little-t seemed to resonate.   The custom of crossing oneself along with a few liturgical practices seemed to be a very strange reason for a schism.   As MK said there was not a bishop for so long, I'd be curious if there was just some alienation going on.

I know there were clashes later, but that's butting heads over little-t stuff. 

It just seems everywhere else that there was a defined bishop vs. bishop and the reasons were stated. This looks like some kind of alienated drift with latter clashes.  ???

Seemed almost needless?  Like - "okie, you cross yourself the old way we use to do it, but now there is a new way" = schism (and their thoughts backwards where they'd go on little t tradition)

I think you used an interesting word "needless".  There seemed to be alienation as well.  Does anybody know if there was a geographical (distance) issue?
I learned how to be more frugal and save money at http://www.livingpress.com

Offline Nephi

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,825
  • A non-Chalcedonian in Chalcedonian clothing.
  • Faith: Orthodox
Re: Old believer info needed
« Reply #7 on: January 03, 2014, 09:31:30 PM »
All but one "coverted" online and not having met real Old Believers to begin with.

I've seen a few real Old Believers (of various kinds) posting on Facebook pages, but oddly enough only one real one here. The others make even Hyperdox Herman blush in embarrassment.

Offline mike

  • A sexual pervert with limited English reading comprehension
  • Protostrator
  • ***************
  • Posts: 24,872
  • Polish Laser Jesus shooting down schismatics
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Diocese of Białystok and Gdańsk
Re: Old believer info needed
« Reply #8 on: January 03, 2014, 09:33:31 PM »
I think you used an interesting word "needless".  There seemed to be alienation as well.  Does anybody know if there was a geographical (distance) issue?

They were fleeing to remote areas or even outside Russia to escape persecutions.
Hyperdox Herman, Eastern Orthodox Christian News - fb, Eastern Orthodox Christian News - tt

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? Who can watch the watchmen?
"No one is paying attention to your post reports"
Why do posters that claim to have me blocked keep sending me pms and responding to my posts? That makes no sense.

Offline yeshuaisiam

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,695
  • A pulling horse cannot kick.
Re: Old believer info needed
« Reply #9 on: January 03, 2014, 09:35:47 PM »
It's as Michal said. The original practice was closer to the modern one. It was Russia that went a bit too far away from that tradition. When the liturgical reforms began to help heal the differences between the Slavs and Greeks, the Old Believers believed that the Greek practice was wrong and schism.

I didn't say that.

I said the practices were different. Which one was older, "more traditional" or more "Orthodox" not really being important.

Quote
This is based on my very low level of knowledge of the schism. There are a few OBs on the forum, maybe they can speak up.

All but one "coverted" online and not having met real Old Believers to begin with.

I'd be curious if there are some transcripts or recordings of the schism.  I've just never understood it completely.   The liturgical differences appear so 'small'.  Not much different than some EO churches that use the new and old calendar which remain in communion - or beards vs. no beards.  Three fingers vs. two fingers.   ???
I learned how to be more frugal and save money at http://www.livingpress.com

Offline mike

  • A sexual pervert with limited English reading comprehension
  • Protostrator
  • ***************
  • Posts: 24,872
  • Polish Laser Jesus shooting down schismatics
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Diocese of Białystok and Gdańsk
Re: Old believer info needed
« Reply #10 on: January 03, 2014, 09:37:07 PM »
I'd be curious if there are some transcripts or recordings of the schism.  I've just never understood it completely.   The liturgical differences appear so 'small'.  Not much different than some EO churches that use the new and old calendar which remain in communion - or beards vs. no beards.  Three fingers vs. two fingers.   ???

Says the guy that criticizes the usage of liturgical utensils...

They seemed big enough for them.
« Last Edit: January 03, 2014, 09:37:41 PM by Michał Kalina »
Hyperdox Herman, Eastern Orthodox Christian News - fb, Eastern Orthodox Christian News - tt

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? Who can watch the watchmen?
"No one is paying attention to your post reports"
Why do posters that claim to have me blocked keep sending me pms and responding to my posts? That makes no sense.

Offline xOrthodox4Christx

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,191
  • Faith: Orthodox Catholic Church
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: Old believer info needed
« Reply #11 on: January 03, 2014, 09:38:12 PM »
From my, again limited, understanding it was mainly the sign of the Cross, and mistranslations in the Old Believer liturgy that led to the schism.

Quote
I'd be curious if there are some transcripts or recordings of the schism.  I've just never understood it completely.
lol Modern technology in the 17th century.
“There is your brother, naked, crying, and you stand there confused over the choice of an attractive floor covering.”- St. Ambrose of Milan

"Now one cannot be a half-hearted Christian, but only entirely or not at all." -Fr. Seraphim Rose

"He who does not love his brother whom he has seen cannot love God whom he has not seen." (1 John 4:20)

Offline mike

  • A sexual pervert with limited English reading comprehension
  • Protostrator
  • ***************
  • Posts: 24,872
  • Polish Laser Jesus shooting down schismatics
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Diocese of Białystok and Gdańsk
Re: Old believer info needed
« Reply #12 on: January 03, 2014, 09:40:24 PM »
From my, again limited, understanding it was mainly the sign of the Cross, and mistranslations in the Old Believer liturgy that led to the schism.

There hadn't been mistranslations. They argued about spelling the name of Jesus. Sounds familiar?
Hyperdox Herman, Eastern Orthodox Christian News - fb, Eastern Orthodox Christian News - tt

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? Who can watch the watchmen?
"No one is paying attention to your post reports"
Why do posters that claim to have me blocked keep sending me pms and responding to my posts? That makes no sense.

Offline Iconodule

  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 13,116
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Ecumenical Patriarchate (ACROD)
Re: Old believer info needed
« Reply #13 on: January 03, 2014, 09:41:21 PM »
It's as Michal said. The original practice was closer to the modern one. It was Russia that went a bit too far away from that tradition.

Actually it's been pretty well proven that the opposite was the case. However, the academic reformers at that time were operating under the assumption that, if Russia received her liturgy from the Greeks, then the Greeks' practice must be the most original. In fact, it was the Greek practice that had changed.
Quote
“A goose to hatch the Crystal Egg after an Eagle had half-hatched it! Aye, aye, to be sure, that’s right,” said the Old Woman of Beare. “And now you must go find out what happened to it. Go now, and when you come back I will give you your name.”
- from The King of Ireland's Son, by Padraic Colum

Offline Nephi

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,825
  • A non-Chalcedonian in Chalcedonian clothing.
  • Faith: Orthodox
Re: Old believer info needed
« Reply #14 on: January 03, 2014, 09:42:50 PM »
It may be worth mentioning that views on this topic (from the MP side, at least) appear to have changed to some degree over time, which others know better. Orthodoxwiki mentions the anathemas against Old Believers being lifted in 1971. There are also Old Believers under the MP now, or at least one ROCOR parish - the Church of the Nativity.

Offline mike

  • A sexual pervert with limited English reading comprehension
  • Protostrator
  • ***************
  • Posts: 24,872
  • Polish Laser Jesus shooting down schismatics
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Diocese of Białystok and Gdańsk
Re: Old believer info needed
« Reply #15 on: January 03, 2014, 09:45:40 PM »
It may be worth mentioning that views on this topic (from the MP side, at least) appear to have changed to some degree over time, which others know better. Orthodoxwiki mentions the anathemas against Old Believers being lifted in 1971. There are also Old Believers under the MP now, or at least one ROCOR parish - the Church of the Nativity.

Actually, the pre-Nikonian rite was debanned in XVIIIth century.
Hyperdox Herman, Eastern Orthodox Christian News - fb, Eastern Orthodox Christian News - tt

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? Who can watch the watchmen?
"No one is paying attention to your post reports"
Why do posters that claim to have me blocked keep sending me pms and responding to my posts? That makes no sense.

Offline Nephi

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,825
  • A non-Chalcedonian in Chalcedonian clothing.
  • Faith: Orthodox
Re: Old believer info needed
« Reply #16 on: January 03, 2014, 09:48:52 PM »
It may be worth mentioning that views on this topic (from the MP side, at least) appear to have changed to some degree over time, which others know better. Orthodoxwiki mentions the anathemas against Old Believers being lifted in 1971. There are also Old Believers under the MP now, or at least one ROCOR parish - the Church of the Nativity.

Actually, the pre-Nikonian rite was debanned in XVIIIth century.

I had to look up what century those Roman numerals even referred to, but thanks.

So is Orthodoxwiki wrong, or were the lifted anathemas those against Old Believer leaders etc. and not the rite itself?

Offline mike

  • A sexual pervert with limited English reading comprehension
  • Protostrator
  • ***************
  • Posts: 24,872
  • Polish Laser Jesus shooting down schismatics
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Diocese of Białystok and Gdańsk
Re: Old believer info needed
« Reply #17 on: January 03, 2014, 09:54:22 PM »
There are also Old Believers under the MP now, or at least one ROCOR parish - the Church of the Nativity.

There are around 30 parishes altogether.

So is Orthodoxwiki wrong, or were the lifted anathemas those against Old Believer leaders etc. and not the rite itself?

I have no idea. I suppose it was just a nice gesture similar to another one lifting of anathemas that happened around that time.
Hyperdox Herman, Eastern Orthodox Christian News - fb, Eastern Orthodox Christian News - tt

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? Who can watch the watchmen?
"No one is paying attention to your post reports"
Why do posters that claim to have me blocked keep sending me pms and responding to my posts? That makes no sense.

Offline yeshuaisiam

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,695
  • A pulling horse cannot kick.
Re: Old believer info needed
« Reply #18 on: January 03, 2014, 10:28:27 PM »
I'd be curious if there are some transcripts or recordings of the schism.  I've just never understood it completely.   The liturgical differences appear so 'small'.  Not much different than some EO churches that use the new and old calendar which remain in communion - or beards vs. no beards.  Three fingers vs. two fingers.   ???

Says the guy that criticizes the usage of liturgical utensils...

They seemed big enough for them.

This would be consistent though for me, as these things technically are little-t.   Still though, you are right, it obviously was a big enough difference.
« Last Edit: January 03, 2014, 10:28:42 PM by yeshuaisiam »
I learned how to be more frugal and save money at http://www.livingpress.com

Offline Mor Ephrem

  • Take comfort in the warmth of the Jacuzzi of Oriental Orthodoxy
  • Section Moderator
  • Protospatharios
  • *****
  • Posts: 32,812
  • Pope Pius XIII, play for us!
    • OrthodoxChristianity.net
  • Faith: The Ancienter Faith
  • Jurisdiction: East
Re: Old believer info needed
« Reply #19 on: January 03, 2014, 10:38:42 PM »
It's as Michal said. The original practice was closer to the modern one. It was Russia that went a bit too far away from that tradition.

Actually it's been pretty well proven that the opposite was the case. However, the academic reformers at that time were operating under the assumption that, if Russia received her liturgy from the Greeks, then the Greeks' practice must be the most original. In fact, it was the Greek practice that had changed.

My impression of the situation matches Iconodule's: "Old Believer" liturgical practices reflect older usages of the Byzantine rite, even if done in a "Russian" style as opposed to a "Greek" style, but at the time the reformers took it for granted that the Russians had changed what they received from the Greeks, not thinking that it could be the other way around (the progression of "Greek" liturgical changes is rather interesting, actually).  I don't blame the reformers for this presumption, as it is a natural mistake to make. 

Almost two years ago, I attended Sunday services at the Old Rite church in Erie, PA (ROCOR), and honestly, it was the most "Indian Orthodox"/"OO" Byzantine service I ever attended: much of the popular piety, liturgical practices, rubrics, etc. observed by these Russians were also traditional among us, while in contrast the standard "Nikonian" Russian service is different enough to register as "something else".  That one experience sold me on the "Old Rite". 

Thank you for the information.   Yes, as I was looking the Big-T vs. little-t seemed to resonate.   The custom of crossing oneself along with a few liturgical practices seemed to be a very strange reason for a schism.   
 

One thing we often forget is how the lex orandi, the "rule of prayer" of the Church, is thoroughly intertwined with her lex credendi, or "rule of faith".  This is so not only in a theoretical/theological sense, but also in the consciousness of the faithful.  With regard to the Byzantine rite in the "Greek" communities, it was developing and evolving along with the people, so changes and reforms, while noted, did not cause so much anxiety.  When the Slavs were evangelised by Constantinople, however, the Orthodox faith came with a whole, "ready to go" liturgical rite associated with it.  When they accepted Christianity, they also accepted the Byzantine rite as it was given to them.  Changes to the liturgical rites, to the wording of prayers, etc. were tantamount to changing the faith of the Church, if not in reality, then in the thinking of the people.  In such a context, it is easy to see why changing the position of one's fingers when making the sign of the Cross, or when to bow and when to prostrate, or whatever would be the cause of scandal, and why people would fight so hard to preserve their traditions: they saw it as protecting the faith.  Nowadays, we may not see such things as "dealbreakers", but there definitely are liturgical rites, customs, and prayers which, if changed, would cause anxiety for EO Christians even today.   

« Last Edit: January 03, 2014, 10:39:12 PM by Mor Ephrem »
Quote
The erection of one’s rod counts as a form of glory (Theophylaktos of Ohrid, A Defense of Eunuchs, p. 329).

The whole forum is Mor. We're emanations of his godlike mind.

Offline Shanghaiski

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,980
  • Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia
Re: Old believer info needed
« Reply #20 on: January 03, 2014, 10:48:25 PM »

Almost two years ago, I attended Sunday services at the Old Rite church in Erie, PA (ROCOR), and honestly, it was the most "Indian Orthodox"/"OO" Byzantine service I ever attended: much of the popular piety, liturgical practices, rubrics, etc. observed by these Russians were also traditional among us, while in contrast the standard "Nikonian" Russian service is different enough to register as "something else".  That one experience sold me on the "Old Rite". 


Could you expand, please? This is interesting.
Quote from: GabrieltheCelt
If you spend long enough on this forum, you'll come away with all sorts of weird, untrue ideas of Orthodox Christianity.
Quote from: orthonorm
I would suggest most persons in general avoid any question beginning with why.

Offline Yurysprudentsiya

  • Private Fora
  • Archon
  • *
  • Posts: 2,737
  • God, the Great, the Only, Keep for Us Our Ukraine!
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: OCA, with a love for the UOC-USA
Re: Old believer info needed
« Reply #21 on: January 03, 2014, 10:48:42 PM »
I've been researching the "Old Believer" Orthodox for a while now, and pretty intensely for the last week.  I'm trying to get more information about "what exactly happened" as to why the schism took place.

I'm having trouble understanding a few things.

First, was the tradition of the church the two finger cross up until the (nearly) the point of their schism?  If so why was the change needed?

Also with the procession what was the original tradition?  Clock wise or counter clock wise?   Why was that change needed?

Why were these things so important (the changes) that it caused splits in the church?   If Orthodox Christians were practicing traditional Orthodoxy and Orthodoxy "changed" yet these bishops felt they didn't need to change, how are these things worth a schism?

Russian practice was to use the two finger cross and a host of other practices.  The Patriarch Nikon got copies of Greek service books and reformed the Russian liturgy to comport with them.  Unfortunately he was wrong in that the Greek practice was newer and the Russian was older.  Some people, nobles included, outright condemned the revisions.  Even if the change in the Russian practice was mistaken, the Old Believers entered schism because they were essentially charging Greek practice as heretical.  

They were mercilessly persecuted in barbaric fashion, however, because they were essentially attacking Patriarch Nikon.  There is a famous picture of an Old Believer noblewoman being led away to prison or death defiantly holding up the two finger cross.  They were called a derogatory name beginning with r.

They are divided into groups who acquired a hierarchy much later and others who believe that the priesthood is gone because of corruption.  The latter group are the priest less Old Believers and they split several more times.  

The rapprochement mirrors the RC position on the Latin Mass vis a vis SSPX.  The Russian Orthodox made an offer for the Old Believers to reunite and practice the old rite as long as they acknowledged the new rite as valid too.  Some did and are Old Rite Orthodox.  Most did not and are separate.  The priestly ones have their own Patriarch of Moscow.  

Offline Mor Ephrem

  • Take comfort in the warmth of the Jacuzzi of Oriental Orthodoxy
  • Section Moderator
  • Protospatharios
  • *****
  • Posts: 32,812
  • Pope Pius XIII, play for us!
    • OrthodoxChristianity.net
  • Faith: The Ancienter Faith
  • Jurisdiction: East
Re: Old believer info needed
« Reply #22 on: January 03, 2014, 11:30:43 PM »

Almost two years ago, I attended Sunday services at the Old Rite church in Erie, PA (ROCOR), and honestly, it was the most "Indian Orthodox"/"OO" Byzantine service I ever attended: much of the popular piety, liturgical practices, rubrics, etc. observed by these Russians were also traditional among us, while in contrast the standard "Nikonian" Russian service is different enough to register as "something else".  That one experience sold me on the "Old Rite". 


Could you expand, please? This is interesting.

Hmm, I'll try.

I wasn't able to go to the parish the evening before, so I had to read Vespers and Matins on my own, but when I got there on Sunday morning, to my surprise, they were doing the Midnight Office and the Hours (including the Ninth, which was weird, but whatever) in full, which is like our practice (morning services in the morning, evening services in the evening)...so I didn't feel bad that I skipped the Hours at home.  :) 

The sexes were segregated strictly, as in our practice, and not like my experience in "Nikonian" churches where that is more or less a guideline but not a rule.  The music was not the harmonised stuff, but was chant, and some of the melodies were very similar to our own chant (the "reading" tone also was similar to ours).  No pews, and though I don't know if others took off their shoes, I wasn't looked at strangely for having done so.  I seem to recall a custom where the people would extend their hands in a sort of orans posture at certain points, especially when the priest or deacon censed them...they would even reach out with their hands for the smoke to move it towards themselves, which is a very (East) Syriac practice which our devout people still do (and we use the orans posture for prayer quite often, and at the Lord's Prayer as a rule).  The people in the congregation were friendly and welcoming (unlike my experience with congregations at more ethnic "Nikonian" Russian churches), but not overly so (as has been my experience with OCA congregations)...they welcomed me, but they also wanted to pray the Liturgy and let me pray it without being an obstacle to either of us (and they didn't know me to know that I'd be comfortable).  That's more or less how our people do things when they're at their best.   

There were some other similarities, but I forget.  I was very impressed, overall, with the experience: in terms of liturgical customs, I've never felt more at home in an EO church than I did there (it's a pity there are so few of them!).  The similarities of practice highlighted, for me anyway, how ancient their usages must be if Indians had a little more in common with them than they did with Greek Antioch.  I wish there was a way for the Old Rite to become more commonplace.         
Quote
The erection of one’s rod counts as a form of glory (Theophylaktos of Ohrid, A Defense of Eunuchs, p. 329).

The whole forum is Mor. We're emanations of his godlike mind.

Offline Alveus Lacuna

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,278
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: OCA
Re: Old believer info needed
« Reply #23 on: January 03, 2014, 11:38:03 PM »
As I think another person mentioned, the Roman Catholics retain the oldest usage of the sign of the cross. I think they do it before or after epistle readings, where they use the thumb to cross the forehead, the lips, and then the chest. I'm not sure if that's entirely correct, but it is exceedingly ancient as I understand it.

Offline Shanghaiski

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,980
  • Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia
Re: Old believer info needed
« Reply #24 on: January 03, 2014, 11:46:55 PM »

Almost two years ago, I attended Sunday services at the Old Rite church in Erie, PA (ROCOR), and honestly, it was the most "Indian Orthodox"/"OO" Byzantine service I ever attended: much of the popular piety, liturgical practices, rubrics, etc. observed by these Russians were also traditional among us, while in contrast the standard "Nikonian" Russian service is different enough to register as "something else".  That one experience sold me on the "Old Rite". 


Could you expand, please? This is interesting.

Hmm, I'll try.

I wasn't able to go to the parish the evening before, so I had to read Vespers and Matins on my own, but when I got there on Sunday morning, to my surprise, they were doing the Midnight Office and the Hours (including the Ninth, which was weird, but whatever) in full, which is like our practice (morning services in the morning, evening services in the evening)...so I didn't feel bad that I skipped the Hours at home.  :) 

The sexes were segregated strictly, as in our practice, and not like my experience in "Nikonian" churches where that is more or less a guideline but not a rule.  The music was not the harmonised stuff, but was chant, and some of the melodies were very similar to our own chant (the "reading" tone also was similar to ours).  No pews, and though I don't know if others took off their shoes, I wasn't looked at strangely for having done so.  I seem to recall a custom where the people would extend their hands in a sort of orans posture at certain points, especially when the priest or deacon censed them...they would even reach out with their hands for the smoke to move it towards themselves, which is a very (East) Syriac practice which our devout people still do (and we use the orans posture for prayer quite often, and at the Lord's Prayer as a rule).  The people in the congregation were friendly and welcoming (unlike my experience with congregations at more ethnic "Nikonian" Russian churches), but not overly so (as has been my experience with OCA congregations)...they welcomed me, but they also wanted to pray the Liturgy and let me pray it without being an obstacle to either of us (and they didn't know me to know that I'd be comfortable).  That's more or less how our people do things when they're at their best.   

There were some other similarities, but I forget.  I was very impressed, overall, with the experience: in terms of liturgical customs, I've never felt more at home in an EO church than I did there (it's a pity there are so few of them!).  The similarities of practice highlighted, for me anyway, how ancient their usages must be if Indians had a little more in common with them than they did with Greek Antioch.  I wish there was a way for the Old Rite to become more commonplace.         

Thank you for this. That is interesting. I would really like to get out more and visit other Orthodox services. (I like my lestovka more than my prayer rope. And the Old Orthodox prayerbook is great.)
Quote from: GabrieltheCelt
If you spend long enough on this forum, you'll come away with all sorts of weird, untrue ideas of Orthodox Christianity.
Quote from: orthonorm
I would suggest most persons in general avoid any question beginning with why.

Offline Mor Ephrem

  • Take comfort in the warmth of the Jacuzzi of Oriental Orthodoxy
  • Section Moderator
  • Protospatharios
  • *****
  • Posts: 32,812
  • Pope Pius XIII, play for us!
    • OrthodoxChristianity.net
  • Faith: The Ancienter Faith
  • Jurisdiction: East
Re: Old believer info needed
« Reply #25 on: January 03, 2014, 11:50:29 PM »
As I think another person mentioned, the Roman Catholics retain the oldest usage of the sign of the cross. I think they do it before or after epistle readings, where they use the thumb to cross the forehead, the lips, and then the chest. I'm not sure if that's entirely correct, but it is exceedingly ancient as I understand it.

It is ancient, yes, and they have retained it for at least one moment in their liturgy (before the reading of the Gospel).  I think it might be done at the invitatory of Matins, but I could be wrong.  

Syriac tradition (definitely West Syriac, but probably also East Syriac) has retained it in the form of priestly blessings: priests will bless people with a Cross traced on their foreheads, not just at anointings, but when absolving penitents, praying over the sick, "ordinary" blessings, etc.  The people generally don't do it, preferring the standard sign of the Cross, but I've seen it done (and done it myself) when there is a need to be inconspicuous.  Some of the liturgical hymns which refer to the sign of the Cross refer exclusively to this earlier form of the sign, which, to me, is a sign of their antiquity.  
Quote
The erection of one’s rod counts as a form of glory (Theophylaktos of Ohrid, A Defense of Eunuchs, p. 329).

The whole forum is Mor. We're emanations of his godlike mind.

Offline Mor Ephrem

  • Take comfort in the warmth of the Jacuzzi of Oriental Orthodoxy
  • Section Moderator
  • Protospatharios
  • *****
  • Posts: 32,812
  • Pope Pius XIII, play for us!
    • OrthodoxChristianity.net
  • Faith: The Ancienter Faith
  • Jurisdiction: East
Re: Old believer info needed
« Reply #26 on: January 03, 2014, 11:57:44 PM »
(I like my lestovka more than my prayer rope. And the Old Orthodox prayerbook is great.)

I am too poor to afford a good lestovka, but I suspect that's not the only reason I prefer knots.  :P

The Old Orthodox prayerbook is very good: it's the most "liturgical" EO prayerbook available that doesn't require an analogion to use comfortably.  In that respect (contents and format), it is like our own "lay" prayerbooks.  The little booklet A Son of the Church is also very helpful and sensible.     
Quote
The erection of one’s rod counts as a form of glory (Theophylaktos of Ohrid, A Defense of Eunuchs, p. 329).

The whole forum is Mor. We're emanations of his godlike mind.

Offline Alveus Lacuna

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,278
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: OCA
Re: Old believer info needed
« Reply #27 on: January 04, 2014, 12:13:16 AM »
The Old Orthodox prayerbook is very good: it's the most "liturgical" EO prayerbook available that doesn't require an analogion to use comfortably.  In that respect (contents and format), it is like our own "lay" prayerbooks.  The little booklet A Son of the Church is also very helpful and sensible.

I have recently started using my Old Rite prayer book more simply because my four year old son ruined my Jordanville ROCOR book by pouring olive oil all over it. The pages are now transparent and impossible to read.

I used to only use it for canons for the departed, but now that I've had to dig deeper out of necessity since it is my only prayer book, there are a couple of things that strike me:

1. During the morning and evening prayers there are litanies to the saints included, such as petitions for prayers to Peter and Paul, John the Baptist, Holy Hierarch Nicholas, etc. This reminds me of the litanies to the saints in Roman Catholic piety, and I assume it is pretty ancient.

2. The canon for Holy Communion is totally different from the Jordanville prayer book. I assume it's an older canon, because there is a huge focus on the sacrificial aspect of the liturgy, i.e. Christ immolated upon the altar, etc. This seems more in keeping with the other ancient apostolic churches, like in Roman Catholicism how the Mass is understood as a sacrifice, or in the Syriac/Aramaic usage the liturgy is referred to as the Qurbano or whatever, which is rooted in the same Hebrew word for sacrifice. I think that the understanding of the liturgy as a sacrificial offering in Orthodoxy has wained with the newer revisionist theological trends from St. Vlads and such. Perhaps fears of Latin encroachment where there need be none?

I don't know how accurate those observations are, but I'm really enjoying using it at home for a fresh angle on things from an EO perspective. I have zero desire to use the two finger signing though as I think Punch does, as it strikes me as artificially applied to modern piety. But you have intrigued me about the Old Believer liturgy and how different it might be.
« Last Edit: January 04, 2014, 12:16:55 AM by Alveus Lacuna »

Offline Mor Ephrem

  • Take comfort in the warmth of the Jacuzzi of Oriental Orthodoxy
  • Section Moderator
  • Protospatharios
  • *****
  • Posts: 32,812
  • Pope Pius XIII, play for us!
    • OrthodoxChristianity.net
  • Faith: The Ancienter Faith
  • Jurisdiction: East
Re: Old believer info needed
« Reply #28 on: January 04, 2014, 12:47:10 AM »
1. During the morning and evening prayers there are litanies to the saints included, such as petitions for prayers to Peter and Paul, John the Baptist, Holy Hierarch Nicholas, etc. This reminds me of the litanies to the saints in Roman Catholic piety, and I assume it is pretty ancient.

IIRC, there is something similar to what you describe in the service of Great Compline: perhaps the prayerbook "borrowed" it from that source.  However it got there, that was one feature I liked (our books have similar features). 

Quote
2. The canon for Holy Communion is totally different from the Jordanville prayer book. I assume it's an older canon, because there is a huge focus on the sacrificial aspect of the liturgy, i.e. Christ immolated upon the altar, etc. This seems more in keeping with the other ancient apostolic churches, like in Roman Catholicism how the Mass is understood as a sacrifice, or in the Syriac/Aramaic usage the liturgy is referred to as the Qurbano or whatever, which is rooted in the same Hebrew word for sacrifice. I think that the understanding of the liturgy as a sacrificial offering in Orthodoxy has wained with the newer revisionist theological trends from St. Vlads and such. Perhaps fears of Latin encroachment where there need be none?

I haven't read the pre-Communion prayers from this book, but your comment makes me want to look at it more closely and see for myself. 

I'm not sure what you're referring to re: the waning of "liturgy as sacrifice" and "revisionist trends from St Vlad's".  I was at the epicenter for a while and noticed nothing "revisionist" in this regard.  Then again, I'm a Qurbono man myself. 

Quote
I don't know how accurate those observations are, but I'm really enjoying using it at home for a fresh angle on things from an EO perspective. I have zero desire to use the two finger signing though as I think Punch does, as it strikes me as artificially applied to modern piety. But you have intrigued me about the Old Believer liturgy and how different it might be.

Maybe someone out there knows if an entire Liturgy has ever been uploaded to Youtube or something.  It really was a sublime experience to worship like that in person, but even a video would be nice...I'm too far away from Erie. 
Quote
The erection of one’s rod counts as a form of glory (Theophylaktos of Ohrid, A Defense of Eunuchs, p. 329).

The whole forum is Mor. We're emanations of his godlike mind.

Offline Nephi

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,825
  • A non-Chalcedonian in Chalcedonian clothing.
  • Faith: Orthodox
Re: Old believer info needed
« Reply #29 on: January 04, 2014, 01:53:03 AM »
I think that the understanding of the liturgy as a sacrificial offering in Orthodoxy has wained with the newer revisionist theological trends from St. Vlads and such.

You know, I've heard this multiple times just recently online and I'm not sure what to think. I've honestly never heard of the DL described as being non-sacrificial. Every Orthodox priest or theologian I've heard on the topic describe it as sacrificial, and a quick Google search shows the OCA/AOCNA/GOA websites explicitly affirming its sacrificial character. The text of the DL itself seems clear that it is a sacrificial offering. So outside of an insignificant minority of anti-Catholic hyperdox, I'm not sure why anyone says the East became more anti-/non-sacrificial with the starting of the neo-patristic movement. Was it somehow more sacrificial before?

Offline Mor Ephrem

  • Take comfort in the warmth of the Jacuzzi of Oriental Orthodoxy
  • Section Moderator
  • Protospatharios
  • *****
  • Posts: 32,812
  • Pope Pius XIII, play for us!
    • OrthodoxChristianity.net
  • Faith: The Ancienter Faith
  • Jurisdiction: East
Re: Old believer info needed
« Reply #30 on: January 04, 2014, 02:11:53 AM »
The text of the DL itself seems clear that it is a sacrificial offering.

Not just the text, but every Liturgy makes the sacrificial character of the offering clear in its rubrics.  As I've noted before elsewhere, the use of a spear to pierce the bread (which itself is referred to as the Lamb) makes the Byzantine proskomide probably the most graphic in terms of sacrificial imagery associated with the preparation of the offering.  I don't think anyone else has anything similar until you get to the rites of fraction, and certainly there are no knives involved.   
Quote
The erection of one’s rod counts as a form of glory (Theophylaktos of Ohrid, A Defense of Eunuchs, p. 329).

The whole forum is Mor. We're emanations of his godlike mind.

Offline Nephi

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,825
  • A non-Chalcedonian in Chalcedonian clothing.
  • Faith: Orthodox
Re: Old believer info needed
« Reply #31 on: January 04, 2014, 02:31:09 AM »
Not just the text, but every Liturgy makes the sacrificial character of the offering clear in its rubrics.  As I've noted before elsewhere, the use of a spear to pierce the bread (which itself is referred to as the Lamb) makes the Byzantine proskomide probably the most graphic in terms of sacrificial imagery associated with the preparation of the offering.  I don't think anyone else has anything similar until you get to the rites of fraction, and certainly there are no knives involved.   

Interesting, and I had no idea about the spear bit. Looking at this page for the proskomide, you're right - it is rather graphically explicit.

Perhaps the claim that the EO have become non-sacrificial is more of a dismissal of the neo-patristic movement?

Offline mike

  • A sexual pervert with limited English reading comprehension
  • Protostrator
  • ***************
  • Posts: 24,872
  • Polish Laser Jesus shooting down schismatics
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Diocese of Białystok and Gdańsk
Re: Old believer info needed
« Reply #32 on: January 04, 2014, 08:15:27 AM »
I'm just learning about them not agreeing with them.

Hm...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_KjiX-zPzw

I know these are some old believers, and this group really appeals to me.

However, I have next to a zero chance of finding something like this in the USA.

Is there anything even close to this in the USA?  I may even be willing to relocate be it God's will.
Hyperdox Herman, Eastern Orthodox Christian News - fb, Eastern Orthodox Christian News - tt

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? Who can watch the watchmen?
"No one is paying attention to your post reports"
Why do posters that claim to have me blocked keep sending me pms and responding to my posts? That makes no sense.

Offline Mor Ephrem

  • Take comfort in the warmth of the Jacuzzi of Oriental Orthodoxy
  • Section Moderator
  • Protospatharios
  • *****
  • Posts: 32,812
  • Pope Pius XIII, play for us!
    • OrthodoxChristianity.net
  • Faith: The Ancienter Faith
  • Jurisdiction: East
Re: Old believer info needed
« Reply #33 on: January 04, 2014, 08:18:26 AM »
Perhaps the claim that the EO have become non-sacrificial is more of a dismissal of the neo-patristic movement?

Well, I'd be interested in hearing about the original comment, both in terms of EO in general and with regard to "revisionism at SVS" in particular, and I think we would need to begin by understanding what idea of sacrifice underlies it.
Quote
The erection of one’s rod counts as a form of glory (Theophylaktos of Ohrid, A Defense of Eunuchs, p. 329).

The whole forum is Mor. We're emanations of his godlike mind.

Offline Alveus Lacuna

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,278
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: OCA
Re: Old believer info needed
« Reply #34 on: January 04, 2014, 12:08:11 PM »
All that I was saying is that it's not emphasized as such in popular piety, at least in my observation. The fact is that in the Latin church the phrase "The Sacrifice of the Mass" is common, and like I said the Syriac churches don't call it a liturgy, a mass, "going to church" or whatever. They actually call the service a sacrifice/Qurbono. Like, "Hey, it's Sunday. Time to go to the Holy Sacrifice."

Co-incidentally, I have also been reading Fr. James Bernstein's book again recently and he deals with this issue of sacrifice in Christianity and what it really means. He ties it in with the Jewish notion of sacrifice and argues against the notion of a "vicarious victim", saying that a Qurbono, or whatever the Hebrew word is, means a "Holy Gift", and that it is about transforming the offerer rather than God Himself, which makes sense, but to me it still does not resolve the imagery of the scapegoat entirely. How do we understand a scapegoat in the Christian sacrificial conception?

Finally, I have often noticed that the older EO churches in places like Serbia that the iconography also points to the sacrificial character of the eucharist. I'm thinking in particular of images of the Christ child upon the altar, usually in the chalice. These images used to disturb me, while at this point I'm more curious how to understand them. The ideal of the priest killing the Christ so that we can drink his blood isn't exactly the point, but that's what all of that imagery points to…"immolated upon the altar" and such? It seems in some ways horrific. So how are we to understand it?



« Last Edit: January 04, 2014, 12:19:53 PM by Alveus Lacuna »

Offline Alpo

  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 9,209
  • Je suis Janusz Korwin-Mikke
  • Faith: I'm a Vegan
  • Jurisdiction: But my heart belongs to ROCOR
Re: Old believer info needed
« Reply #35 on: January 04, 2014, 12:12:01 PM »
All that I was saying is that it's not emphasized as such in popular piety, at lead in my observation.

And in many rather trendy theological works.
But the stranger that dwelleth with you shall be unto you as one born among you, and thou shalt love him as thyself; for ye were strangers in the land of Egypt: I am the LORD your God.
Leviticus 19:34

Offline Alveus Lacuna

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,278
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: OCA
Re: Old believer info needed
« Reply #36 on: January 04, 2014, 12:27:06 PM »
All that I was saying is that it's not emphasized as such in popular piety, at lead in my observation.

And in many rather trendy theological works.

Please try and keep the sass out for a bit. I don't understand what your comment is really trying to say, if anything.

Offline Alpo

  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 9,209
  • Je suis Janusz Korwin-Mikke
  • Faith: I'm a Vegan
  • Jurisdiction: But my heart belongs to ROCOR
Re: Old believer info needed
« Reply #37 on: January 04, 2014, 12:28:58 PM »
All that I was saying is that it's not emphasized as such in popular piety, at lead in my observation.

And in many rather trendy theological works.

Please try and keep the sass out for a bit. I don't understand what your comment is really trying to say, if anything.

 ???

I was agreeing with you and you have problem with that?
But the stranger that dwelleth with you shall be unto you as one born among you, and thou shalt love him as thyself; for ye were strangers in the land of Egypt: I am the LORD your God.
Leviticus 19:34

Offline Alveus Lacuna

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,278
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: OCA
Re: Old believer info needed
« Reply #38 on: January 04, 2014, 02:04:25 PM »
Sorry, I guess something got lost in translation. Does anybody have any insight into the questions I raised above?

Offline Shanghaiski

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,980
  • Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia
Re: Old believer info needed
« Reply #39 on: January 04, 2014, 02:31:20 PM »
All that I was saying is that it's not emphasized as such in popular piety, at lead in my observation.

And in many rather trendy theological works.

From which may the good Lord deliver us.
Quote from: GabrieltheCelt
If you spend long enough on this forum, you'll come away with all sorts of weird, untrue ideas of Orthodox Christianity.
Quote from: orthonorm
I would suggest most persons in general avoid any question beginning with why.

Offline Salpy

  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 14,429
  • Holy Martyrs of the Armenian Genocide pray for us!
Re: Old believer info needed
« Reply #40 on: January 04, 2014, 02:48:45 PM »
All that I was saying is that it's not emphasized as such in popular piety, at least in my observation. The fact is that in the Latin church the phrase "The Sacrifice of the Mass" is common, and like I said the Syriac churches don't call it a liturgy, a mass, "going to church" or whatever. They actually call the service a sacrifice/Qurbono. Like, "Hey, it's Sunday. Time to go to the Holy Sacrifice."

It's the same in Armenian.  In Armenian the liturgy is called "soorp badarak," which means "holy sacrifice."

Offline Mor Ephrem

  • Take comfort in the warmth of the Jacuzzi of Oriental Orthodoxy
  • Section Moderator
  • Protospatharios
  • *****
  • Posts: 32,812
  • Pope Pius XIII, play for us!
    • OrthodoxChristianity.net
  • Faith: The Ancienter Faith
  • Jurisdiction: East
Re: Old believer info needed
« Reply #41 on: January 04, 2014, 02:51:44 PM »
All that I was saying is that it's not emphasized as such in popular piety, at least in my observation. The fact is that in the Latin church the phrase "The Sacrifice of the Mass" is common, and like I said the Syriac churches don't call it a liturgy, a mass, "going to church" or whatever. They actually call the service a sacrifice/Qurbono. Like, "Hey, it's Sunday. Time to go to the Holy Sacrifice."

I would suggest that there's more to it than terminology.  For instance, Syrians use "Qurbono" and Armenians use "Badarak", but does the average parishioner who wakes up and says "Hey, it's Sunday, time to go to Qurbono/Badarak" have it in mind that he's going to exercise his baptismal priesthood as a type of concelebrant with the priest and deacons in offering a sacrifice to God?  Not necessarily: in my experience, that's just the word most people use for the main Sunday service they attend, whether or not they have any idea of participating in sacrifice.  I prefer this sort of word to "Mass" or "Liturgy" precisely for its meaning, but the average person uses them interchangeably.

There's more to it than terminology.  The RC's have the concept of "the holy sacrifice of the Mass", but the liturgical understanding of that notion versus the popular, "traditional" understanding is often two different things.  The former is generally orthodox, but the latter often doesn't factor in the Resurrection and Ascension, seeing the sacrifice only in terms of the Passion.  Just having a notion of sacrifice, then, is not enough.  

The traditional Western liturgies and the traditional Eastern liturgies make clear in their prayers and rites that the Eucharist is a sacrifice.  But that notion of sacrifice--what it means, what it doesn't mean, how it is offered, and so on--has to filter down to the people properly, and I think it is possible for the faithful to have the proper notion even if it is not as explicit as, for example, the Roman Catholics.    

Quote
Co-incidentally, I have also been reading Fr. James Bernstein's book again recently and he deals with this issue of sacrifice in Christianity and what it really means. He ties it in with the Jewish notion of sacrifice and argues against the notion of a "vicarious victim", saying that a Qurbono, or whatever the Hebrew word is, means a "Holy Gift", and that it is about transforming the offerer rather than God Himself, which makes sense, but to me it still does not resolve the imagery of the scapegoat entirely. How do we understand a scapegoat in the Christian sacrificial conception?

I'm not sure what you're getting at.  What is "the imagery of the scapegoat" to you and how do you think it factors (or ought to factor) into the idea of Eucharist as sacrifice?  

Quote
Finally, I have often noticed that the older EO churches in places like Serbia that the iconography also points to the sacrificial character of the eucharist. I'm thinking in particular of images of the Christ child upon the altar, usually in the chalice. These images used to disturb me, while at this point I'm more curious how to understand them. The ideal of the priest killing the Christ so that we can drink his blood isn't exactly the point, but that's what all of that imagery points to…"immolated upon the altar" and such? It seems in some ways horrific. So how are we to understand it?

I'll defer to others on the iconography.  We don't have such imagery in our tradition, though I do find it intriguing.  
Quote
The erection of one’s rod counts as a form of glory (Theophylaktos of Ohrid, A Defense of Eunuchs, p. 329).

The whole forum is Mor. We're emanations of his godlike mind.

Offline Salpy

  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 14,429
  • Holy Martyrs of the Armenian Genocide pray for us!
Re: Old believer info needed
« Reply #42 on: January 04, 2014, 02:55:47 PM »
All that I was saying is that it's not emphasized as such in popular piety, at least in my observation. The fact is that in the Latin church the phrase "The Sacrifice of the Mass" is common, and like I said the Syriac churches don't call it a liturgy, a mass, "going to church" or whatever. They actually call the service a sacrifice/Qurbono. Like, "Hey, it's Sunday. Time to go to the Holy Sacrifice."

I would suggest that there's more to it than terminology.  For instance, Syrians use "Qurbono" and Armenians use "Badarak", but does the average parishioner who wakes up and says "Hey, it's Sunday, time to go to Qurbono/Badarak" have it in mind that he's going to exercise his baptismal priesthood as a type of concelebrant with the priest and deacons in offering a sacrifice to God?  Not necessarily: in my experience, that's just the word most people use for the main Sunday service they attend, whether or not they have any idea of participating in sacrifice.  

Very true of the Armenians.

Offline yeshuaisiam

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,695
  • A pulling horse cannot kick.
Re: Old believer info needed
« Reply #43 on: January 05, 2014, 11:33:59 PM »
I'm just learning about them not agreeing with them.

Hm...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_KjiX-zPzw

I know these are some old believers, and this group really appeals to me.

However, I have next to a zero chance of finding something like this in the USA.

Is there anything even close to this in the USA?  I may even be willing to relocate be it God's will.

Relocation and living near somebody for lifestyle and values is not always about being in communion with somebody or going to their church.   For one, they would have good farming values, something that I like.   Two, they would not be part of world orthodoxy, which I like as well.    And yes, I still disagree if they venerate icons - however, that doesn't make them demons in my eyes.   Just as I don't agree with EO's veneration of icons, but I don't think you guys are evil either, just mislead.

I just want to relay that in my world, I don't always have to have a perfect bond with somebody to work in mutual respect and love with that person (or people).    I appreciate EO Christians - especially old school ones with old school values and lifestyles.
« Last Edit: January 05, 2014, 11:36:57 PM by yeshuaisiam »
I learned how to be more frugal and save money at http://www.livingpress.com

Offline Velsigne

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,021
Re: Old believer info needed
« Reply #44 on: January 06, 2014, 06:17:59 AM »
They have the largest community in the US in Oregon, around Woodburn and Mt. Angel.  I remember working in one business and on one home.  They had the big Kuvasc type sheep protecting dogs on the farm.   I've seen some of the women taking piece work, and they are always very modestly dressed.  

Another group is up in Alaska.  You can google this stuff.  

Old Believers Oregon

History of Old Believers in Oregon

Oregon History Project: Russian Old Believers

Three centuries on, Russian Old Believers hang on in Oregon

I've also heard that on some of the reforms being imposed it was a departure from tradition.  There was also the suspicion that the Greeks didn't quite have it right anymore as they blended with the Turks and took up their traditions, like robe style or whatever. 

http://www.metafilter.com/127740/The-Old-Believers

There's also a documentary that deals with disparate groups that have been shuffled around Romania and out of the way places.  One of the groups is Old Believers:

Jana Sevciková Old Believers
« Last Edit: January 06, 2014, 06:28:14 AM by Velsigne »
A nation is not conquered until the hearts of its women are on the ground.

Then it is done, no matter how brave its warriors nor how strong their weapons -- Cheyenne proverb