Author Topic: Old Believers and Orthodoxy  (Read 39645 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline andrewlya

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,879
  • God is One & Jesus is the Mashiach.
    • One GOD and One Messiah.
  • Faith: Christian Monotheism
  • Jurisdiction: Pro-Conservatism. Anti-liberalism.
Old Believers and Orthodoxy
« on: February 12, 2015, 07:08:11 PM »
Hi all,

I have come across Orthodox Old Believers in one article, so wanted to know what is a difference between Orthodox Old Believers and conventional Orthodoxy?

Thank you.

God bless.
I believe in ONE God the Father YHWH and I also believe in His Son Lord Yeshua,the Ha Mashiach.
https://yrm.org/
https://www.facebook.com/groups/Eusebian/
http://www.arianismtoday.com/

Offline Theophania

  • Ecumenical Dissipation Association *OF* America
  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 3,809
  • Faith: Orthodox
Re: Old Believers and Orthodoxy
« Reply #1 on: February 12, 2015, 07:23:09 PM »
This is a basic explanation from the church in Erie, which is under ROCOR but retains the Old Rite (there is also a priestless OB group in Erie who aren't in communion with any canonical group):

http://www.churchofthenativity.net/old-rite/
It's common knowledge that you secretly want to be born in early 17th century Russia.  As a serf or a royal, I know not.  Chances are serf.

Offline andrewlya

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,879
  • God is One & Jesus is the Mashiach.
    • One GOD and One Messiah.
  • Faith: Christian Monotheism
  • Jurisdiction: Pro-Conservatism. Anti-liberalism.
Re: Old Believers and Orthodoxy
« Reply #2 on: February 12, 2015, 07:25:19 PM »
Thank you, how are they viewed by ordinary Orthodox Christians? Are they deemed to be heretics ?
I believe in ONE God the Father YHWH and I also believe in His Son Lord Yeshua,the Ha Mashiach.
https://yrm.org/
https://www.facebook.com/groups/Eusebian/
http://www.arianismtoday.com/

Offline Theophania

  • Ecumenical Dissipation Association *OF* America
  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 3,809
  • Faith: Orthodox
Re: Old Believers and Orthodoxy
« Reply #3 on: February 12, 2015, 07:48:33 PM »
I found another parish who is under the Georgian Patriarchate:

http://www.holytheotokoschurch.org/

Thank you, how are they viewed by ordinary Orthodox Christians? Are they deemed to be heretics ?

I will let someone else answer this, since I only have my personal opinion and not an official one.
It's common knowledge that you secretly want to be born in early 17th century Russia.  As a serf or a royal, I know not.  Chances are serf.

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 Believers and Orthodoxy
« Reply #4 on: February 13, 2015, 12:39:19 PM »
so are you asking about the kind that retained (or, to be more frank, acquired) priesthood or the ones that did not? The latter would definitely have heretic teachings being nothing more than Protestants with icons.
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 PeterTheAleut

  • The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
  • Hypatos
  • *****************
  • Posts: 37,280
  • Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: Old Believers and Orthodoxy
« Reply #5 on: February 13, 2015, 03:47:10 PM »
Hi all,

I have come across Orthodox Old Believers in one article, so wanted to know what is a difference between Orthodox Old Believers and conventional Orthodoxy?

Thank you.

God bless.
Back in the middle of the 17th century, Nikon, Patriarch of Moscow, attempted in a rather hamfisted way to reform the service books then in use in the Russian Church to make them more consistent with the Greek practice currently in use at that time. Many Russian Orthodox saw the demanded liturgical changes as heretical (e.g., crossing oneself with three fingers as opposed to the old practice of crossing oneself with two) and refused to enforce them, even to the point of breaking communion with Moscow. These Orthodox who insisted on following the old rites without change became known as the Old Believers (or, more correctly, the Old Rite Orthodox).

As far as any heresy in their ways, I'm not sure. Some believed that they still had authority to consecrate bishops and ordain priests, while other more extreme adherents believed that the Orthodox episcopacy had apostatized completely, leaving them with no sacramental authority to ordain new priests or bishops. These are the priestless Old Believers. If there's any heresy at all in the Old Believers, I would suggest that it's in their Pharisaical adherence to the externals of our worship to the extent of breaking into schism from those who followed a different rite.

I know that's a simplistic way of explaining whom the Old Believers are and what they believe, but I think this will offer a basic answer to your question. If you want a better example, though he's probably an example of only the most extreme groups of Old Believers, you might try reading the posts of our occasional poster Hopeful Faithful.
Not all who wander are lost.

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 Believers and Orthodoxy
« Reply #6 on: February 13, 2015, 03:50:41 PM »
If there's any heresy at all in the Old Believers, I would suggest that it's in their Pharisaical adherence to the externals of our worship to the extent of breaking into schism from those who followed a different rite.

And claims that the Church was destroyed and there are no one to minister  sacraments aren't heresies?

Quote
If you want a better example, though he's probably an example of only the most extreme groups of Old Believers, you might try reading the posts of our occasional poster Hopeful Faithful.

Like he knows anything about Old Believers.
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 PeterTheAleut

  • The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
  • Hypatos
  • *****************
  • Posts: 37,280
  • Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: Old Believers and Orthodoxy
« Reply #7 on: February 13, 2015, 04:00:15 PM »
If there's any heresy at all in the Old Believers, I would suggest that it's in their Pharisaical adherence to the externals of our worship to the extent of breaking into schism from those who followed a different rite.

And claims that the Church was destroyed and there are no one to minister  sacraments aren't heresies?
My goal here is not to give an exhaustive list of all the heresies in priestless Old Believerism.

Quote
If you want a better example, though he's probably an example of only the most extreme groups of Old Believers, you might try reading the posts of our occasional poster Hopeful Faithful.

Like he knows anything about Old Believers.
I'm not here to get in a fight with you, so please tone down the aggression in your posts.

And don't EVER call me Pete.
Not all who wander are lost.

Offline andrewlya

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,879
  • God is One & Jesus is the Mashiach.
    • One GOD and One Messiah.
  • Faith: Christian Monotheism
  • Jurisdiction: Pro-Conservatism. Anti-liberalism.
Re: Old Believers and Orthodoxy
« Reply #8 on: February 13, 2015, 06:24:42 PM »
I found another parish who is under the Georgian Patriarchate:

http://www.holytheotokoschurch.org/

Thank you, how are they viewed by ordinary Orthodox Christians? Are they deemed to be heretics ?

I will let someone else answer this, since I only have my personal opinion and not an official one.
Thank you for the info!
I believe in ONE God the Father YHWH and I also believe in His Son Lord Yeshua,the Ha Mashiach.
https://yrm.org/
https://www.facebook.com/groups/Eusebian/
http://www.arianismtoday.com/

Offline andrewlya

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,879
  • God is One & Jesus is the Mashiach.
    • One GOD and One Messiah.
  • Faith: Christian Monotheism
  • Jurisdiction: Pro-Conservatism. Anti-liberalism.
Re: Old Believers and Orthodoxy
« Reply #9 on: February 13, 2015, 06:29:09 PM »
so are you asking about the kind that retained (or, to be more frank, acquired) priesthood or the ones that did not? The latter would definitely have heretic teachings being nothing more than Protestants with icons.
Im not sure what exactly Im asking as this is the 1st time I've come across the "Old Believers". I wanted to know what general difference is between them and Orthodox as they seem to be very much alike, although I think the O.B. think they are the original Orthodox Christians, if I am not mistaken.
I believe in ONE God the Father YHWH and I also believe in His Son Lord Yeshua,the Ha Mashiach.
https://yrm.org/
https://www.facebook.com/groups/Eusebian/
http://www.arianismtoday.com/

Offline andrewlya

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,879
  • God is One & Jesus is the Mashiach.
    • One GOD and One Messiah.
  • Faith: Christian Monotheism
  • Jurisdiction: Pro-Conservatism. Anti-liberalism.
Re: Old Believers and Orthodoxy
« Reply #10 on: February 13, 2015, 06:30:52 PM »
Hi all,

I have come across Orthodox Old Believers in one article, so wanted to know what is a difference between Orthodox Old Believers and conventional Orthodoxy?

Thank you.

God bless.
Back in the middle of the 17th century, Nikon, Patriarch of Moscow, attempted in a rather hamfisted way to reform the service books then in use in the Russian Church to make them more consistent with the Greek practice currently in use at that time. Many Russian Orthodox saw the demanded liturgical changes as heretical (e.g., crossing oneself with three fingers as opposed to the old practice of crossing oneself with two) and refused to enforce them, even to the point of breaking communion with Moscow. These Orthodox who insisted on following the old rites without change became known as the Old Believers (or, more correctly, the Old Rite Orthodox).

As far as any heresy in their ways, I'm not sure. Some believed that they still had authority to consecrate bishops and ordain priests, while other more extreme adherents believed that the Orthodox episcopacy had apostatized completely, leaving them with no sacramental authority to ordain new priests or bishops. These are the priestless Old Believers. If there's any heresy at all in the Old Believers, I would suggest that it's in their Pharisaical adherence to the externals of our worship to the extent of breaking into schism from those who followed a different rite.

I know that's a simplistic way of explaining whom the Old Believers are and what they believe, but I think this will offer a basic answer to your question. If you want a better example, though he's probably an example of only the most extreme groups of Old Believers, you might try reading the posts of our occasional poster Hopeful Faithful.
Thank you for the info.
About crossing oneself with 2 fingers, why two fingers since the 3 finger crossing represents the Trinity. What does crossing with 2 fingers represent?
I believe in ONE God the Father YHWH and I also believe in His Son Lord Yeshua,the Ha Mashiach.
https://yrm.org/
https://www.facebook.com/groups/Eusebian/
http://www.arianismtoday.com/

Offline andrewlya

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,879
  • God is One & Jesus is the Mashiach.
    • One GOD and One Messiah.
  • Faith: Christian Monotheism
  • Jurisdiction: Pro-Conservatism. Anti-liberalism.
Re: Old Believers and Orthodoxy
« Reply #11 on: February 13, 2015, 06:34:11 PM »
Can we go to their Churches and take Holy Communion, for example?
I believe in ONE God the Father YHWH and I also believe in His Son Lord Yeshua,the Ha Mashiach.
https://yrm.org/
https://www.facebook.com/groups/Eusebian/
http://www.arianismtoday.com/

Offline Theophania

  • Ecumenical Dissipation Association *OF* America
  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 3,809
  • Faith: Orthodox
Re: Old Believers and Orthodoxy
« Reply #12 on: February 13, 2015, 06:36:13 PM »
Can we go to their Churches and take Holy Communion, for example?

If they are in communion with your jurisdiction, but most are not in communion with any of the canonical churches.
It's common knowledge that you secretly want to be born in early 17th century Russia.  As a serf or a royal, I know not.  Chances are serf.

Offline WPM

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,486
Re: Old Believers and Orthodoxy
« Reply #13 on: February 13, 2015, 07:42:16 PM »
Why is the Church so far away? ...
Learn meditation.

Online Volnutt

  • Dull Sublunary Lover
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 8,334
  • Faith: Evangelical by default
  • Jurisdiction: Spiritually homeless
Re: Old Believers and Orthodoxy
« Reply #14 on: February 13, 2015, 07:54:24 PM »
Why is the Church so far away? ...

Quote
But what does it say? "THE WORD IS NEAR YOU, IN YOUR MOUTH AND IN YOUR HEART "-- that is, the word of faith which we are preaching, that if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved- Romans 10:8-9
Quote
The breath of Thine Holy Spirit inspires artists, poets and scientists. The power of Thy supreme knowledge makes them prophets and interpreters of Thy laws, who reveal the depths of Thy creative wisdom. Their works speak unwittingly of Thee. How great art Thou in Thy creation! How great art Thou in man!
Akathist Hymn- Glory to God for All Things

Offline PeterTheAleut

  • The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
  • Hypatos
  • *****************
  • Posts: 37,280
  • Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: Old Believers and Orthodoxy
« Reply #15 on: February 13, 2015, 08:28:08 PM »
Hi all,

I have come across Orthodox Old Believers in one article, so wanted to know what is a difference between Orthodox Old Believers and conventional Orthodoxy?

Thank you.

God bless.
Back in the middle of the 17th century, Nikon, Patriarch of Moscow, attempted in a rather hamfisted way to reform the service books then in use in the Russian Church to make them more consistent with the Greek practice currently in use at that time. Many Russian Orthodox saw the demanded liturgical changes as heretical (e.g., crossing oneself with three fingers as opposed to the old practice of crossing oneself with two) and refused to enforce them, even to the point of breaking communion with Moscow. These Orthodox who insisted on following the old rites without change became known as the Old Believers (or, more correctly, the Old Rite Orthodox).

As far as any heresy in their ways, I'm not sure. Some believed that they still had authority to consecrate bishops and ordain priests, while other more extreme adherents believed that the Orthodox episcopacy had apostatized completely, leaving them with no sacramental authority to ordain new priests or bishops. These are the priestless Old Believers. If there's any heresy at all in the Old Believers, I would suggest that it's in their Pharisaical adherence to the externals of our worship to the extent of breaking into schism from those who followed a different rite.

I know that's a simplistic way of explaining whom the Old Believers are and what they believe, but I think this will offer a basic answer to your question. If you want a better example, though he's probably an example of only the most extreme groups of Old Believers, you might try reading the posts of our occasional poster Hopeful Faithful.
Thank you for the info.
About crossing oneself with 2 fingers, why two fingers since the 3 finger crossing represents the Trinity. What does crossing with 2 fingers represent?
I believe the two-fingered way bears the symbolism of the dual nature of Christ. The reason Old Believers cite in their argument that the 3-fingered sign of the cross is a heresy is that we're "crucifying the Holy Trinity".
Not all who wander are lost.

Offline andrewlya

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,879
  • God is One & Jesus is the Mashiach.
    • One GOD and One Messiah.
  • Faith: Christian Monotheism
  • Jurisdiction: Pro-Conservatism. Anti-liberalism.
Re: Old Believers and Orthodoxy
« Reply #16 on: February 14, 2015, 05:16:58 AM »
Can we go to their Churches and take Holy Communion, for example?

If they are in communion with your jurisdiction, but most are not in communion with any of the canonical churches.
Do they reject it us or do we reject them?
I believe in ONE God the Father YHWH and I also believe in His Son Lord Yeshua,the Ha Mashiach.
https://yrm.org/
https://www.facebook.com/groups/Eusebian/
http://www.arianismtoday.com/

Offline andrewlya

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,879
  • God is One & Jesus is the Mashiach.
    • One GOD and One Messiah.
  • Faith: Christian Monotheism
  • Jurisdiction: Pro-Conservatism. Anti-liberalism.
Re: Old Believers and Orthodoxy
« Reply #17 on: February 14, 2015, 05:18:44 AM »
Hi all,

I have come across Orthodox Old Believers in one article, so wanted to know what is a difference between Orthodox Old Believers and conventional Orthodoxy?

Thank you.

God bless.
Back in the middle of the 17th century, Nikon, Patriarch of Moscow, attempted in a rather hamfisted way to reform the service books then in use in the Russian Church to make them more consistent with the Greek practice currently in use at that time. Many Russian Orthodox saw the demanded liturgical changes as heretical (e.g., crossing oneself with three fingers as opposed to the old practice of crossing oneself with two) and refused to enforce them, even to the point of breaking communion with Moscow. These Orthodox who insisted on following the old rites without change became known as the Old Believers (or, more correctly, the Old Rite Orthodox).

As far as any heresy in their ways, I'm not sure. Some believed that they still had authority to consecrate bishops and ordain priests, while other more extreme adherents believed that the Orthodox episcopacy had apostatized completely, leaving them with no sacramental authority to ordain new priests or bishops. These are the priestless Old Believers. If there's any heresy at all in the Old Believers, I would suggest that it's in their Pharisaical adherence to the externals of our worship to the extent of breaking into schism from those who followed a different rite.

I know that's a simplistic way of explaining whom the Old Believers are and what they believe, but I think this will offer a basic answer to your question. If you want a better example, though he's probably an example of only the most extreme groups of Old Believers, you might try reading the posts of our occasional poster Hopeful Faithful.
Thank you for the info.
About crossing oneself with 2 fingers, why two fingers since the 3 finger crossing represents the Trinity. What does crossing with 2 fingers represent?
I believe the two-fingered way bears the symbolism of the dual nature of Christ. The reason Old Believers cite in their argument that the 3-fingered sign of the cross is a heresy is that we're "crucifying the Holy Trinity".
From what I can see the Old Believers are Original Orthodox and we are reformed..
I believe in ONE God the Father YHWH and I also believe in His Son Lord Yeshua,the Ha Mashiach.
https://yrm.org/
https://www.facebook.com/groups/Eusebian/
http://www.arianismtoday.com/

Offline hecma925

  • Non-clairvoyant, but you can call me Elder
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 14,188
  • Unbreakable! He's alive, dammit! It's a MIRACLE!
  • Faith: Truthful Chalcedonian Truther
  • Jurisdiction: Candle-lighting Cross Kisser
Re: Old Believers and Orthodoxy
« Reply #18 on: February 14, 2015, 05:41:14 AM »
Hi all,

I have come across Orthodox Old Believers in one article, so wanted to know what is a difference between Orthodox Old Believers and conventional Orthodoxy?

Thank you.

God bless.
Back in the middle of the 17th century, Nikon, Patriarch of Moscow, attempted in a rather hamfisted way to reform the service books then in use in the Russian Church to make them more consistent with the Greek practice currently in use at that time. Many Russian Orthodox saw the demanded liturgical changes as heretical (e.g., crossing oneself with three fingers as opposed to the old practice of crossing oneself with two) and refused to enforce them, even to the point of breaking communion with Moscow. These Orthodox who insisted on following the old rites without change became known as the Old Believers (or, more correctly, the Old Rite Orthodox).

As far as any heresy in their ways, I'm not sure. Some believed that they still had authority to consecrate bishops and ordain priests, while other more extreme adherents believed that the Orthodox episcopacy had apostatized completely, leaving them with no sacramental authority to ordain new priests or bishops. These are the priestless Old Believers. If there's any heresy at all in the Old Believers, I would suggest that it's in their Pharisaical adherence to the externals of our worship to the extent of breaking into schism from those who followed a different rite.

I know that's a simplistic way of explaining whom the Old Believers are and what they believe, but I think this will offer a basic answer to your question. If you want a better example, though he's probably an example of only the most extreme groups of Old Believers, you might try reading the posts of our occasional poster Hopeful Faithful.
Thank you for the info.
About crossing oneself with 2 fingers, why two fingers since the 3 finger crossing represents the Trinity. What does crossing with 2 fingers represent?
I believe the two-fingered way bears the symbolism of the dual nature of Christ. The reason Old Believers cite in their argument that the 3-fingered sign of the cross is a heresy is that we're "crucifying the Holy Trinity".
From what I can see the Old Believers are Original Orthodox and we are reformed..

"We"?
Happy shall he be, that shall take and dash thy little ones against the rock. Alleluia.

Once Christ has filled the Cross, it can never be empty again.

"But God doesn't need your cookies!  Arrive on time!"

Offline Mor Ephrem

  • Take comfort in the warmth of the Jacuzzi of Oriental Orthodoxy
  • Section Moderator
  • Protospatharios
  • *****
  • Posts: 33,071
  • Two half-eggs
    • OrthodoxChristianity.net
  • Faith: The Ancienter Faith
  • Jurisdiction: East
Re: Old Believers and Orthodoxy
« Reply #19 on: February 14, 2015, 01:32:02 PM »
"We"?

You beat me to it.  I wasn't aware that Arians were in communion with anyone.
Please don't project meta-debates onto me.

Quote
The erection of one’s rod counts as a form of glory (Theophylaktos of Ohrid, A Defense of Eunuchs, p. 329).

Offline Porter ODoran

  • PHILIA NIKA
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 11,380
  • St. John the Beloved, pray for me
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: GOAA
Re: Old Believers and Orthodoxy
« Reply #20 on: February 14, 2015, 02:09:48 PM »
Hi all,

I have come across Orthodox Old Believers in one article, so wanted to know what is a difference between Orthodox Old Believers and conventional Orthodoxy?

Thank you.

God bless.
Back in the middle of the 17th century, Nikon, Patriarch of Moscow, attempted in a rather hamfisted way to reform the service books then in use in the Russian Church to make them more consistent with the Greek practice currently in use at that time. Many Russian Orthodox saw the demanded liturgical changes as heretical (e.g., crossing oneself with three fingers as opposed to the old practice of crossing oneself with two) and refused to enforce them, even to the point of breaking communion with Moscow. These Orthodox who insisted on following the old rites without change became known as the Old Believers (or, more correctly, the Old Rite Orthodox).

As far as any heresy in their ways, I'm not sure. Some believed that they still had authority to consecrate bishops and ordain priests, while other more extreme adherents believed that the Orthodox episcopacy had apostatized completely, leaving them with no sacramental authority to ordain new priests or bishops. These are the priestless Old Believers. If there's any heresy at all in the Old Believers, I would suggest that it's in their Pharisaical adherence to the externals of our worship to the extent of breaking into schism from those who followed a different rite.

I know that's a simplistic way of explaining whom the Old Believers are and what they believe, but I think this will offer a basic answer to your question. If you want a better example, though he's probably an example of only the most extreme groups of Old Believers, you might try reading the posts of our occasional poster Hopeful Faithful.
Thank you for the info.
About crossing oneself with 2 fingers, why two fingers since the 3 finger crossing represents the Trinity. What does crossing with 2 fingers represent?
I believe the two-fingered way bears the symbolism of the dual nature of Christ. The reason Old Believers cite in their argument that the 3-fingered sign of the cross is a heresy is that we're "crucifying the Holy Trinity".
From what I can see the Old Believers are Original Orthodox and we are reformed..

There are ways in which this is true. Russia was interested in correcting her practice against Greece, at that time, but we now know that in some ways what Russia was practicing was older than what Greece was practicing (at that time). However, there's more to Orthodoxy than having an older tradition, and at any rate the controversy had an aftermath in which Old Believers basically rejected normative Orthodoxy altogether.
"Love ... is an abyss of illumination, a mountain of fire ... . It is the condition of angels, the progress of eternity" (Climacus).

Quote from: Seekingtrue
Yes we who are far from sainthood we can recognize a living saint and I'm talking from personal experience.Yes they are gentle soo gentle it can not be described it is like gentleness and humility in one and also they have this light this energy it's beyond words...and when you are near them you feel ecstatic and very happy

Offline andrewlya

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,879
  • God is One & Jesus is the Mashiach.
    • One GOD and One Messiah.
  • Faith: Christian Monotheism
  • Jurisdiction: Pro-Conservatism. Anti-liberalism.
Re: Old Believers and Orthodoxy
« Reply #21 on: February 14, 2015, 08:26:13 PM »
Hi all,

I have come across Orthodox Old Believers in one article, so wanted to know what is a difference between Orthodox Old Believers and conventional Orthodoxy?

Thank you.

God bless.
Back in the middle of the 17th century, Nikon, Patriarch of Moscow, attempted in a rather hamfisted way to reform the service books then in use in the Russian Church to make them more consistent with the Greek practice currently in use at that time. Many Russian Orthodox saw the demanded liturgical changes as heretical (e.g., crossing oneself with three fingers as opposed to the old practice of crossing oneself with two) and refused to enforce them, even to the point of breaking communion with Moscow. These Orthodox who insisted on following the old rites without change became known as the Old Believers (or, more correctly, the Old Rite Orthodox).

As far as any heresy in their ways, I'm not sure. Some believed that they still had authority to consecrate bishops and ordain priests, while other more extreme adherents believed that the Orthodox episcopacy had apostatized completely, leaving them with no sacramental authority to ordain new priests or bishops. These are the priestless Old Believers. If there's any heresy at all in the Old Believers, I would suggest that it's in their Pharisaical adherence to the externals of our worship to the extent of breaking into schism from those who followed a different rite.

I know that's a simplistic way of explaining whom the Old Believers are and what they believe, but I think this will offer a basic answer to your question. If you want a better example, though he's probably an example of only the most extreme groups of Old Believers, you might try reading the posts of our occasional poster Hopeful Faithful.
Thank you for the info.
About crossing oneself with 2 fingers, why two fingers since the 3 finger crossing represents the Trinity. What does crossing with 2 fingers represent?
I believe the two-fingered way bears the symbolism of the dual nature of Christ. The reason Old Believers cite in their argument that the 3-fingered sign of the cross is a heresy is that we're "crucifying the Holy Trinity".
From what I can see the Old Believers are Original Orthodox and we are reformed..

"We"?
As in ordinary Orthodox..
I believe in ONE God the Father YHWH and I also believe in His Son Lord Yeshua,the Ha Mashiach.
https://yrm.org/
https://www.facebook.com/groups/Eusebian/
http://www.arianismtoday.com/

Offline andrewlya

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,879
  • God is One & Jesus is the Mashiach.
    • One GOD and One Messiah.
  • Faith: Christian Monotheism
  • Jurisdiction: Pro-Conservatism. Anti-liberalism.
Re: Old Believers and Orthodoxy
« Reply #22 on: February 14, 2015, 08:26:59 PM »
"We"?

You beat me to it.  I wasn't aware that Arians were in communion with anyone.
Really..
I believe in ONE God the Father YHWH and I also believe in His Son Lord Yeshua,the Ha Mashiach.
https://yrm.org/
https://www.facebook.com/groups/Eusebian/
http://www.arianismtoday.com/

Offline andrewlya

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,879
  • God is One & Jesus is the Mashiach.
    • One GOD and One Messiah.
  • Faith: Christian Monotheism
  • Jurisdiction: Pro-Conservatism. Anti-liberalism.
Re: Old Believers and Orthodoxy
« Reply #23 on: February 14, 2015, 08:30:43 PM »
Hi all,

I have come across Orthodox Old Believers in one article, so wanted to know what is a difference between Orthodox Old Believers and conventional Orthodoxy?

Thank you.

God bless.
Back in the middle of the 17th century, Nikon, Patriarch of Moscow, attempted in a rather hamfisted way to reform the service books then in use in the Russian Church to make them more consistent with the Greek practice currently in use at that time. Many Russian Orthodox saw the demanded liturgical changes as heretical (e.g., crossing oneself with three fingers as opposed to the old practice of crossing oneself with two) and refused to enforce them, even to the point of breaking communion with Moscow. These Orthodox who insisted on following the old rites without change became known as the Old Believers (or, more correctly, the Old Rite Orthodox).

As far as any heresy in their ways, I'm not sure. Some believed that they still had authority to consecrate bishops and ordain priests, while other more extreme adherents believed that the Orthodox episcopacy had apostatized completely, leaving them with no sacramental authority to ordain new priests or bishops. These are the priestless Old Believers. If there's any heresy at all in the Old Believers, I would suggest that it's in their Pharisaical adherence to the externals of our worship to the extent of breaking into schism from those who followed a different rite.

I know that's a simplistic way of explaining whom the Old Believers are and what they believe, but I think this will offer a basic answer to your question. If you want a better example, though he's probably an example of only the most extreme groups of Old Believers, you might try reading the posts of our occasional poster Hopeful Faithful.
Thank you for the info.
About crossing oneself with 2 fingers, why two fingers since the 3 finger crossing represents the Trinity. What does crossing with 2 fingers represent?
I believe the two-fingered way bears the symbolism of the dual nature of Christ. The reason Old Believers cite in their argument that the 3-fingered sign of the cross is a heresy is that we're "crucifying the Holy Trinity".
From what I can see the Old Believers are Original Orthodox and we are reformed..

There are ways in which this is true. Russia was interested in correcting her practice against Greece, at that time, but we now know that in some ways what Russia was practicing was older than what Greece was practicing (at that time). However, there's more to Orthodoxy than having an older tradition, and at any rate the controversy had an aftermath in which Old Believers basically rejected normative Orthodoxy altogether.
Thanks,Porter. So the main difference is in their tradition and the way they conduct the liturgy?
I believe in ONE God the Father YHWH and I also believe in His Son Lord Yeshua,the Ha Mashiach.
https://yrm.org/
https://www.facebook.com/groups/Eusebian/
http://www.arianismtoday.com/

Offline Porter ODoran

  • PHILIA NIKA
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 11,380
  • St. John the Beloved, pray for me
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: GOAA
Re: Old Believers and Orthodoxy
« Reply #24 on: February 14, 2015, 09:35:51 PM »
Thanks,Porter. So the main difference is in their tradition and the way they conduct the liturgy?

No. The important differences quickly went far beyond that, to the nature of the church itself. The Old Believers became, at heart, more like Anabaptists than Orthodox. I'm sure the practical details have been discussed up-thread by those more knowledgeable than I am about their ecclesiology.
"Love ... is an abyss of illumination, a mountain of fire ... . It is the condition of angels, the progress of eternity" (Climacus).

Quote from: Seekingtrue
Yes we who are far from sainthood we can recognize a living saint and I'm talking from personal experience.Yes they are gentle soo gentle it can not be described it is like gentleness and humility in one and also they have this light this energy it's beyond words...and when you are near them you feel ecstatic and very happy

Offline hecma925

  • Non-clairvoyant, but you can call me Elder
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 14,188
  • Unbreakable! He's alive, dammit! It's a MIRACLE!
  • Faith: Truthful Chalcedonian Truther
  • Jurisdiction: Candle-lighting Cross Kisser
Re: Old Believers and Orthodoxy
« Reply #25 on: February 14, 2015, 11:30:18 PM »
"We"?

You beat me to it.  I wasn't aware that Arians were in communion with anyone.
Really..

Maybe Jehovah's Witnesses.
Happy shall he be, that shall take and dash thy little ones against the rock. Alleluia.

Once Christ has filled the Cross, it can never be empty again.

"But God doesn't need your cookies!  Arrive on time!"

Offline andrewlya

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,879
  • God is One & Jesus is the Mashiach.
    • One GOD and One Messiah.
  • Faith: Christian Monotheism
  • Jurisdiction: Pro-Conservatism. Anti-liberalism.
Re: Old Believers and Orthodoxy
« Reply #26 on: February 15, 2015, 08:45:10 AM »
I believe in ONE God the Father YHWH and I also believe in His Son Lord Yeshua,the Ha Mashiach.
https://yrm.org/
https://www.facebook.com/groups/Eusebian/
http://www.arianismtoday.com/

Offline Gunnarr

  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 2,098
Re: Old Believers and Orthodoxy
« Reply #27 on: February 19, 2015, 07:45:25 PM »
Can we go to their Churches and take Holy Communion, for example?

If they are in communion with your jurisdiction, but most are not in communion with any of the canonical churches.
Do they reject it us or do we reject them?

The reforms required all to adhere to the reforms, or else be expelled from the Church. So yes, they were rejected, just at the same time they rejected the Church.

But the anathema for them is no longer in effect, but that can be interpreted many ways as to their validity
I am a demonic servant! Beware!

Offline Porter ODoran

  • PHILIA NIKA
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 11,380
  • St. John the Beloved, pray for me
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: GOAA
Re: Old Believers and Orthodoxy
« Reply #28 on: February 19, 2015, 09:23:43 PM »
Can we go to their Churches and take Holy Communion, for example?

If they are in communion with your jurisdiction, but most are not in communion with any of the canonical churches.
Do they reject it us or do we reject them?

It's mutual. It's basically shaken out as a schism.
"Love ... is an abyss of illumination, a mountain of fire ... . It is the condition of angels, the progress of eternity" (Climacus).

Quote from: Seekingtrue
Yes we who are far from sainthood we can recognize a living saint and I'm talking from personal experience.Yes they are gentle soo gentle it can not be described it is like gentleness and humility in one and also they have this light this energy it's beyond words...and when you are near them you feel ecstatic and very happy

Offline Hawkeye

  • Διονύσιος ὁ Νέος Άνκορεϊτζίτης
  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 882
  • Matthew 27:52-53
  • Faith: Like unto Neronov
  • Jurisdiction: Old Rite, Chapelist ("Double-Crossers")
Re: Old Believers and Orthodoxy
« Reply #29 on: February 19, 2015, 09:51:51 PM »
Can we go to their Churches and take Holy Communion, for example?

If they are in communion with your jurisdiction, but most are not in communion with any of the canonical churches.
Do they reject it us or do we reject them?

The reforms required all to adhere to the reforms, or else be expelled from the Church. So yes, they were rejected, just at the same time they rejected the Church.

But the anathema for them is no longer in effect, but that can be interpreted many ways as to their validity

At a synodal meeting two weeks ago, the Russian Orthodox Old-Rite Church under Metropolitan Korniliy of Moscow (the Russian portion of the Belokrinitsa Hierarchy) resolved to establish a commission for the continuation of dialogue with the Russian Orthodox Church. Oddly enough, their ultimate goal appears to be the recognition of the canonicity of the Belokrinitsa Hierarchy by the Orthodox Church proper. I'm not sure how serious it is but it seems they've become surprisingly ecumenical in recent years.
« Last Edit: February 19, 2015, 10:01:09 PM by Hawkeye »
"Take heed, you who listen to me: Our misfortune is inevitable, we cannot escape it. If God allows scandals, it is that the elect shall be revealed. Let them be burned, let them be purified, let them who have been tried be made manifest among you."   - The Life of the Archpriest Avvakum by Himself

Offline WPM

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,486
Re: Old Believers and Orthodoxy
« Reply #30 on: February 19, 2015, 10:39:08 PM »
Is that why you become a monk? ...
« Last Edit: February 19, 2015, 10:39:52 PM by WPM »
Learn meditation.

Offline вєликаго

  • Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 389
Re: Old Believers and Orthodoxy
« Reply #31 on: February 27, 2015, 01:38:52 AM »
This is a basic explanation from the church in Erie, which is under ROCOR but retains the Old Rite (there is also a priestless OB group in Erie who aren't in communion with any canonical group):

http://www.churchofthenativity.net/old-rite/

That is not the basic differences, those are the basic differences between Old Ritualists and New Ritualists.

The true basic differences amount to Faith and Dogma.  Old Believers have maintained the Faith given to the Apostles by Christ, and, teach the same Dogmas that were given. Nikonians, those who followed the reforms of Patriarch Nikon, modify not just the outward forms, but the very Faith of our Lord Christ, Jesus. 
« Last Edit: February 27, 2015, 01:43:58 AM by вєликаго »
St. Meletius the Confessor – Submit not yourselves to monastics, nor to presbyters, who teach lawless things and evilly propound them. And why do I say only monastics or presbyters? Follow not even after bishops who guilefully exhort you to do and say and believe things that are not profitable. What

Offline Porter ODoran

  • PHILIA NIKA
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 11,380
  • St. John the Beloved, pray for me
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: GOAA
Re: Old Believers and Orthodoxy
« Reply #32 on: February 27, 2015, 02:06:13 AM »
And yet maintaining the Faith unchanged has so very changed you.
"Love ... is an abyss of illumination, a mountain of fire ... . It is the condition of angels, the progress of eternity" (Climacus).

Quote from: Seekingtrue
Yes we who are far from sainthood we can recognize a living saint and I'm talking from personal experience.Yes they are gentle soo gentle it can not be described it is like gentleness and humility in one and also they have this light this energy it's beyond words...and when you are near them you feel ecstatic and very happy

Offline PeterTheAleut

  • The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
  • Hypatos
  • *****************
  • Posts: 37,280
  • Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: Old Believers and Orthodoxy
« Reply #33 on: February 27, 2015, 04:09:46 AM »
This is a basic explanation from the church in Erie, which is under ROCOR but retains the Old Rite (there is also a priestless OB group in Erie who aren't in communion with any canonical group):

http://www.churchofthenativity.net/old-rite/

That is not the basic differences, those are the basic differences between Old Ritualists and New Ritualists.

The true basic differences amount to Faith and Dogma.  Old Believers have maintained the Faith given to the Apostles by Christ, and, teach the same Dogmas that were given. Nikonians, those who followed the reforms of Patriarch Nikon, modify not just the outward forms, but the very Faith of our Lord Christ, Jesus.
How so? It's not enough to accuse us of changing the very Faith of Our Lord if you don't explain exactly how we do so?
Not all who wander are lost.

Online Volnutt

  • Dull Sublunary Lover
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 8,334
  • Faith: Evangelical by default
  • Jurisdiction: Spiritually homeless
Re: Old Believers and Orthodoxy
« Reply #34 on: February 27, 2015, 04:22:06 AM »
That third finger is the DEVIL'S finger, boi!
Quote
The breath of Thine Holy Spirit inspires artists, poets and scientists. The power of Thy supreme knowledge makes them prophets and interpreters of Thy laws, who reveal the depths of Thy creative wisdom. Their works speak unwittingly of Thee. How great art Thou in Thy creation! How great art Thou in man!
Akathist Hymn- Glory to God for All Things

Offline вєликаго

  • Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 389
Re: Old Believers and Orthodoxy
« Reply #35 on: February 27, 2015, 04:33:04 PM »
This is a basic explanation from the church in Erie, which is under ROCOR but retains the Old Rite (there is also a priestless OB group in Erie who aren't in communion with any canonical group):

http://www.churchofthenativity.net/old-rite/

That is not the basic differences, those are the basic differences between Old Ritualists and New Ritualists.

The true basic differences amount to Faith and Dogma.  Old Believers have maintained the Faith given to the Apostles by Christ, and, teach the same Dogmas that were given. Nikonians, those who followed the reforms of Patriarch Nikon, modify not just the outward forms, but the very Faith of our Lord Christ, Jesus.
How so? It's not enough to accuse us of changing the very Faith of Our Lord if you don't explain exactly how we do so?

At your request, I will begin to show some things, I will do so in parts, I may not address new questions until later. I will try first to address this issue here, before moving on. If I end up side tracked, forgive me.

First off, those who sided with Nikon were in error, the reasons they give for their corrections are an error; they taught that the Old Faith was in fact corruptions and incorrect. They actually anathematized the Old Faith, when they did this, they expelled themselves from the True Church. Now when some (those who followed Nikon into heresy) discovered that was the case they attempted to repent; this is a good thing. When someone who once was in the Church, desires to repent, it is customary for that person to go to the Church, seek confession, and, then they are rejoined to the Church. Christ's Church never ceased from the Earth, it has always existed, the faithful have been commonly known, since the time of Nikon,  as Old Believers. So one of the difference between Nikonians and Old Believers is that the Nikonians teach that the heretics can rightly excommunicate those who stay Faithful to Christ, Jesus.  Not only is this a heresy but the logical implications are (among other things) a heretical belief or implication that "the Church ceased to exist, until the Nikonians repented".

 
« Last Edit: February 27, 2015, 05:03:08 PM by вєликаго »
St. Meletius the Confessor – Submit not yourselves to monastics, nor to presbyters, who teach lawless things and evilly propound them. And why do I say only monastics or presbyters? Follow not even after bishops who guilefully exhort you to do and say and believe things that are not profitable. What

Offline Elisha

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,908
Re: Old Believers and Orthodoxy
« Reply #36 on: February 27, 2015, 04:55:55 PM »
This is a basic explanation from the church in Erie, which is under ROCOR but retains the Old Rite (there is also a priestless OB group in Erie who aren't in communion with any canonical group):

http://www.churchofthenativity.net/old-rite/

That is not the basic differences, those are the basic differences between Old Ritualists and New Ritualists.

The true basic differences amount to Faith and Dogma.  Old Believers have maintained the Faith given to the Apostles by Christ, and, teach the same Dogmas that were given. Nikonians, those who followed the reforms of Patriarch Nikon, modify not just the outward forms, but the very Faith of our Lord Christ, Jesus.
How so? It's not enough to accuse us of changing the very Faith of Our Lord if you don't explain exactly how we do so?

At your request, I will begin to show some things, I will do so in parts, I may not address new questions until later. I will try first to address this issue here, before moving on. If I end up side tracked, forgive me.

First off, those who sides with Nikonian were in error, the reasons they give for their corrections are an error; they taught that the Old Faith was in fact corruptions and incorrect. They actually anathematized the Old Faith, when they did this, they expelled themselves from the True Church. Now when some (those who followed Nikon into heresy) discovered that was the case they attempted to repent; this is a good thing. When someone who once was in the Church, desires to repent, it is customary for that person to go to the Church, seek confession, and, then they are rejoined to the Church. Christ's Church never ceased from the Earth, it has always existed, the faithful have been commonly known, since the time of Nikon,  as Old Believers. So one of the difference between Nikonians and Old Believers is that the Nikonians teach that the heretics can rightly excommunicate those who stay Faithful to Christ, Jesus.  Not only is this a heresy but the logical implications are (among other things) a heretical belief or implication that "the Church ceased to exist, until the Nikonians repented".

I'm sorry, but I don't believe this was an explanation of anything.  Possibly only of an apostate who desires to return to the Church.  This should be straight forward.

"Nikonians" (seriously though, how can someone in the Churches of Greece, Georgia, Antioch, etc be called a Nikonian?):  believe x about y
Old Believers:  believe w about y.

etc.

I'm sure you can succinctly explain how "New Believers" have "changed" the faith per my example above.  Since a large portion of us have no idea of the history or existence of Old Believers, referencing historical events and the ins and outs of such is completely meaningless.

Offline Hawkeye

  • Διονύσιος ὁ Νέος Άνκορεϊτζίτης
  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 882
  • Matthew 27:52-53
  • Faith: Like unto Neronov
  • Jurisdiction: Old Rite, Chapelist ("Double-Crossers")
Re: Old Believers and Orthodoxy
« Reply #37 on: February 27, 2015, 05:28:59 PM »
First off, those who sided with Nikon were in error, the reasons they give for their corrections are an error; they taught that the Old Faith was in fact corruptions and incorrect. They actually anathematized the Old Faith, when they did this, they expelled themselves from the True Church.

What does it mean when "they taught that the Old Faith was in fact corruptions and incorrect?" And what specifically did they anathematize when they anathematized the Old Faith?

Now when some (those who followed Nikon into heresy) discovered that was the case they attempted to repent; this is a good thing. When someone who once was in the Church, desires to repent, it is customary for that person to go to the Church, seek confession, and, then they are rejoined to the Church.

When all the bishops were gone and the priests were dead, who had the power to bind and to loose?

Christ's Church never ceased from the Earth, it has always existed, the faithful have been commonly known, since the time of Nikon,  as Old Believers. So one of the difference between Nikonians and Old Believers is that the Nikonians teach that the heretics can rightly excommunicate those who stay Faithful to Christ, Jesus.  Not only is this a heresy but the logical implications are (among other things) a heretical belief or implication that "the Church ceased to exist, until the Nikonians repented".

I have my doubts that the "Nikonians" teach that heretics can rightly excommunicate anyone, at least in your sense.

Those "logical implications" only come into play if we first adopt your presuppositions.
« Last Edit: February 27, 2015, 05:34:18 PM by Hawkeye »
"Take heed, you who listen to me: Our misfortune is inevitable, we cannot escape it. If God allows scandals, it is that the elect shall be revealed. Let them be burned, let them be purified, let them who have been tried be made manifest among you."   - The Life of the Archpriest Avvakum by Himself

Offline вєликаго

  • Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 389
Re: Old Believers and Orthodoxy
« Reply #38 on: February 27, 2015, 05:48:01 PM »
Here is a quick website that shows some dialogues between Nikonians and Old Believers.

https://archeodox.wordpress.com/2010/10/28/concerning-the-celebration-of-sabbath/

In summary it shows that the teaching of the Old Believers, is that: the Bishops, priests etc do not have the power to abolish an Apostolic teaching; while the Nikonians teach that they have the power to do so.

The Nikonians Make a heretical separation between the laity and the clergy. The Church does not cease to be the Church, just because, it lacks a Priest or a Bishop; because in reality, the Church never lacks these, because, through Christ, Jesus, it always has them.  Moreover, the Church never actually was without priests and Bishops on earth.
« Last Edit: February 27, 2015, 05:52:28 PM by вєликаго »
St. Meletius the Confessor – Submit not yourselves to monastics, nor to presbyters, who teach lawless things and evilly propound them. And why do I say only monastics or presbyters? Follow not even after bishops who guilefully exhort you to do and say and believe things that are not profitable. What

Offline Hawkeye

  • Διονύσιος ὁ Νέος Άνκορεϊτζίτης
  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 882
  • Matthew 27:52-53
  • Faith: Like unto Neronov
  • Jurisdiction: Old Rite, Chapelist ("Double-Crossers")
Re: Old Believers and Orthodoxy
« Reply #39 on: February 27, 2015, 06:29:07 PM »
The Nikonians Make a heretical separation between the laity and the clergy. The Church does not cease to be the Church, just because, it lacks a Priest or a Bishop; because in reality, the Church never lacks these, because, through Christ, Jesus, it always has them.  Moreover, the Church never actually was without priests and Bishops on earth.

I fail to understand how laymen receiving poached priests from heretics made any sense in the light of the canons. But, for the sake of this argument, let's assume that it's a viable option.

I have no problem believing that the Church does not cease to be the Church just because it lacks priests or bishops. That's fine. But it does raise a few questions.

Which group among the multitudes which splintered out after the Raskol was the Church? You certainly can't count all of them in because they certainly didn't believe so.

And if you do include all of them, then what happens when one group manages to get itself a bishop (e.g. Ambrose of Bosnia)? Does the Church suddenly shrink down to just his followers? Because I doubt your hierarchy (Belakrinitsa, yes?) considers all other bodies and hierarchies as being part of it.

And if the Church does experience this loss of membership, how can you say that the Church does not require bishops to constitute itself?
« Last Edit: February 27, 2015, 06:40:21 PM by Hawkeye »
"Take heed, you who listen to me: Our misfortune is inevitable, we cannot escape it. If God allows scandals, it is that the elect shall be revealed. Let them be burned, let them be purified, let them who have been tried be made manifest among you."   - The Life of the Archpriest Avvakum by Himself

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 Believers and Orthodoxy
« Reply #40 on: February 27, 2015, 06:35:42 PM »
@Hawkeye, most people here claiming to be Old Believers, including our friend with grammarly wrong nickname, have no idea about Old Believers and know about that only from the Internet. You are probably the only one poster that has any regular contact with them. so do not bother asking tricky questions because you won't get anything.
« Last Edit: February 27, 2015, 06:35:56 PM by mike »
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 вєликаго

  • Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 389
Re: Old Believers and Orthodoxy
« Reply #41 on: February 27, 2015, 07:21:00 PM »
The Nikonians Make a heretical separation between the laity and the clergy. The Church does not cease to be the Church, just because, it lacks a Priest or a Bishop; because in reality, the Church never lacks these, because, through Christ, Jesus, it always has them.  Moreover, the Church never actually was without priests and Bishops on earth.

I fail to understand how laymen receiving poached priests from heretics made any sense in the light of the canons. But, for the sake of this argument, let's assume that it's a viable option.

I have no problem believing that the Church does not cease to be the Church just because it lacks priests or bishops. That's fine. But it does raise a few questions.

Which group among the multitudes which splintered out after the Raskol was the Church? You certainly can't count all of them in because they certainly didn't believe so.

And if you do include all of them, then what happens when one group manages to get itself a bishop (e.g. Ambrose of Bosnia)? Does the Church suddenly shrink down to just his followers? Because I doubt your hierarchy (Belakrinitsa, yes?) considers all other bodies and hierarchies as being part of it.

And if the Church does experience this loss of membership, how can you say that the Church does not require bishops to constitute itself?

Your questions, to a great degree I cannot answer, and to be honest, does not actually demonstrate a working understanding of Old Believers. First off, Old Believer is the term given to us by the Nikonians, it is actually derogatory in nature; and, since we did not actually create the term, we also did not define who was apart of this "group" or "groups".  So I will attempt to expand on this, and, in doing so I hope it becomes more clear. There is principle two groups of Old Believers, those with priests, and, those without priests. The Nikonians then exaggerate that there is 100's or 1000's, and, some with very wild imaginations declare more.  Actually, however, 85% of all priestless Old Believers are "in communion" with each other; and, like wise so are 85% of all Old Believers with priests.

Quote
I fail to understand how laymen receiving poached priests from heretics made any sense in the light of the canons.

I'm not sure who you are talking about, but, if it is us; than: that is pure slander.
« Last Edit: February 27, 2015, 07:29:44 PM by вєликаго »
St. Meletius the Confessor – Submit not yourselves to monastics, nor to presbyters, who teach lawless things and evilly propound them. And why do I say only monastics or presbyters? Follow not even after bishops who guilefully exhort you to do and say and believe things that are not profitable. What

Offline вєликаго

  • Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 389
Re: Old Believers and Orthodoxy
« Reply #42 on: February 27, 2015, 07:22:31 PM »
@Hawkeye, most people here claiming to be Old Believers, including our friend with grammarly wrong nickname, have no idea about Old Believers and know about that only from the Internet. You are probably the only one poster that has any regular contact with them. so do not bother asking tricky questions because you won't get anything.

Funny, last I checked, I am an Old Believer!

You do demonstrate an eager need to slander; and, you also show that you are eager to claim you know more than you do.
« Last Edit: February 27, 2015, 07:25:53 PM by вєликаго »
St. Meletius the Confessor – Submit not yourselves to monastics, nor to presbyters, who teach lawless things and evilly propound them. And why do I say only monastics or presbyters? Follow not even after bishops who guilefully exhort you to do and say and believe things that are not profitable. What

Offline вєликаго

  • Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 389
Re: Old Believers and Orthodoxy
« Reply #43 on: February 27, 2015, 07:48:46 PM »
A friend of mine shared this on Facebook, so I thought it might benefit others here as well.

Quote from: Archbishop Ioann
"We have nothing to repent for before new-ritualists; and communing with them is not permitted until that time, when they become alike with us, because we never separated with the holy church, but we are fully in it and steadily fulfil its one rule and tradition, as one separates with the church not by place and time, but by the teaching."

Archbishop Ioann
Belokrinitsi hierarch
« Last Edit: February 27, 2015, 07:50:14 PM by вєликаго »
St. Meletius the Confessor – Submit not yourselves to monastics, nor to presbyters, who teach lawless things and evilly propound them. And why do I say only monastics or presbyters? Follow not even after bishops who guilefully exhort you to do and say and believe things that are not profitable. What

Offline PeterTheAleut

  • The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
  • Hypatos
  • *****************
  • Posts: 37,280
  • Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: Old Believers and Orthodoxy
« Reply #44 on: February 27, 2015, 07:54:08 PM »
Here is a quick website that shows some dialogues between Nikonians and Old Believers.

https://archeodox.wordpress.com/2010/10/28/concerning-the-celebration-of-sabbath/

In summary it shows that the teaching of the Old Believers, is that: the Bishops, priests etc do not have the power to abolish an Apostolic teaching; while the Nikonians teach that they have the power to do so.
What Apostolic teaching do we Nikonians claim to have the power to abolish? You keep alluding to this idea that we have changed Apostolic teaching, but you haven't yet explained in any detail what Apostolic teaching we have abolished.

The Nikonians Make a heretical separation between the laity and the clergy.
ISTM that it was St. Ignatius of Antioch who made this "separation" between the laity and the clergy when he identified the bishop as the presence of Christ in the Church and the fountain of all the Church's sacraments and when he instructed the faithful to not do anything without their bishop.

The Church does not cease to be the Church, just because, it lacks a Priest or a Bishop; because in reality, the Church never lacks these, because, through Christ, Jesus, it always has them.  Moreover, the Church never actually was without priests and Bishops on earth.
I'm sorry, but St. Ignatius seems to disagree with your concept of an invisible bishop.
« Last Edit: February 27, 2015, 07:55:19 PM by PeterTheAleut »
Not all who wander are lost.