Recently, being carried away by the study of Russian culture and various paths of spiritual and physical development, many people have become interested in the Old Believers. Indeed, the Old Believers - who are they? There are many opinions and views on this matter. Some believe that these are those Orthodox Christians who profess the faith that existed before church schism since Nikon's reform. Others think that these are people who have chosen a faith for themselves, which Orthodox priests call pagan. The old faith, which was spread before the Baptism of Rus' by order of Prince Vladimir.

Old Believers - who are they?

The first associations that come to mind are people living in the taiga, who have rejected all the benefits of civilization, follow the ancient way of life, do everything themselves, without using any technology. Medicine is also not widespread; all diseases are treated with the prayers of Old Believers and fasting.

How true is this? It’s difficult to say, because Old Believers don’t talk about their lives, don’t sit on social networks, don’t write about it in blogs. The life of Old Believers is secretive, taking place in closed communities, they try not to have unnecessary contact with people. One gets the feeling that they can only be seen by accidentally getting lost in the taiga, wandering for more than one day.

Where do the Old Believers live?

For example, Old Believers live in Siberia. In a harsh and cold climate, it was thanks to them that new unexplored and inaccessible corners of the country were explored. There are Old Believers villages in Altai, several of them - Upper Uimon, Maralnik, Multa, Zamulta. It was in such places that they hid from persecution from the state and the official church.

In the village of Verkhniy Uimon you can visit the Museum of Old Believers and learn in detail about their life and faith. Despite the fact that attitudes towards them have changed in better side With the course of history, Old Believers prefer to choose remote corners of the country to live.

To clarify the questions that involuntarily arise when studying them, it is worth first understanding where they came from and what the difference is between them. Old Believers and Old Believers - who are they?

Where did they come from

To find out the answer to the question of who they are, the Old Believers, you first have to plunge into history.

One of the significant and tragic events There was a schism in the Russian Church in Russia. He divided believers into two camps: followers of the “old faith” who did not want to accept any innovations, and those who humbly accepted the innovations that arose thanks to Nikon’s reforms. appointed by Tsar Alexei, who wanted to change the Russian Church. By the way, the concept of “Orthodoxy” appeared along with Nikon’s reform. Therefore, the phrase “Orthodox Old Believers” is somewhat incorrect. But in modern times this term is quite relevant. Because today the Russian Orthodox Church, or the Old Believers Church, officially exists.

So, changes in religion occurred and entailed many events. It can be said that at that time in the 17th century the first Old Believers appeared in Russia, whose followers exist to this day. They protested against the Nikon reforms, which, in their opinion, changed not only the features of some rituals, but also the faith itself. These innovations were carried out with the goal of making Orthodox rituals in Rus' as similar as possible to Greek and global ones. They were justified by the fact that church books, which were copied by hand, from the time of Epiphany in Rus' had some distortions and typos, according to supporters of innovation.

Why did people resist Nikon's reforms?

Why did people protest against the new reforms? Perhaps the personality of Patriarch Nikon himself played a role here. Tsar Alexei appointed him to the important post of patriarch, giving him the opportunity to radically change the rules and rituals of the Russian church. But this choice was a little strange and not very justified. Patriarch Nikon did not have sufficient experience in creating and carrying out reforms. He grew up in a simple peasant family and eventually became a priest in his village. Soon he moved to the Moscow Novospassky Monastery, where he met the Russian Tsar.

Their views on religion largely coincided, and soon Nikon became patriarch. The latter not only did not have sufficient experience for this role, but, according to many historians, he was domineering and cruel. He wanted power that had no boundaries, and envied Patriarch Filaret in this regard. Trying in every possible way to show his importance, he was active everywhere and not only as a religious figure. For example, he personally participated in the suppression of the uprising in 1650, it was he who wanted brutal reprisals against the rebels.

What changed

Nikon's reform brought significant changes to the Russian Christian faith. That is why opponents of these innovations and followers of the old faith appeared, who later began to be called Old Believers. They were persecuted for many years, were cursed by the church, and only under Catherine II the attitude towards them changed for the better.

During the same period, two concepts appeared: “Old Believer” and “Old Believer”. What is the difference and who they mean, today many people no longer know. In fact, both of these concepts are essentially the same thing.

Despite the fact that Nikon’s reforms brought only splits and uprisings to the country, for some reason there are opinions that they changed almost nothing. Most often, history books indicate only two or three changes, but in reality there are more. So, what has changed and what innovations have occurred? You need to know this in order to understand how the Old Believers differ from the Orthodox believers who belong to the official church.

Sign of the Cross

After the innovation, Christians made the sign of the cross by folding three fingers (or fingers) - the thumb, index and middle. Three fingers or “pinch” implies the Holy Trinity - Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Although earlier, before the reform, only two fingers were used for this. That is, two fingers - the index and middle - were left straight or slightly curved, and the rest were folded together.

It should depict the main two symbols of faith - the Crucifixion and Resurrection of Christ. It was two-fingered fingers that were depicted on many icons and came from Greek sources. Old Believers or Old Believers still use two fingers, making the sign of the cross.

Bows during services

Before the reforms, several types of bows were performed at the service, there were four in total. The first - to the fingers or to the navel, was called ordinary. The second - in the waist, was considered average. The third was called “throwing” and was performed almost to the ground (small bow to the ground). Well, the fourth - to the very ground (great prostration or proskynesis). This whole system of bows is still in effect during Old Believer services.

After the Nikon reform, it was allowed to bow only to the waist.

Changes in books and icons

In the new faith and the old they wrote the name of Christ differently. Previously they wrote Jesus, as in Greek sources. After the reforms, it was necessary to extend his name - Jesus. In fact, it is difficult to say which spelling is closer to the original, since in Greek There is a special symbol indicating the stretching of the letter “i”; it does not exist in the Russian language.

Therefore, to make the spelling match the sound, the letter “i” was added to the name of God. The old spelling of the name of Christ has been preserved in the prayers of the Old Believers, and not only among them, also in the Bulgarian, Serbian, Macedonian, Croatian, Belarusian and Ukrainian languages.

Cross

The cross of the Old Believers and the followers of innovations is significantly different. The followers of ancient Orthodoxy recognized only the eight-pointed version. The Old Believer symbol of the crucifixion is represented by an eight-pointed cross located inside a larger four-pointed one. The most ancient crosses also lack images of the crucified Jesus. For its creators, it was the form itself that was important, rather than the image. The Old Believer's pectoral cross also has the same appearance without the image of the crucifixion.

Among Nikon's innovations regarding the cross, one can also highlight Pilate's inscription. These are the letters that are visible on the uppermost small crossbar of an ordinary cross, which is now sold in church shops - I N T I. This is the inscription left by Pontius Pilate, the Roman procurator who ordered the execution of Jesus. It means "Jesus of Nazareth, King of Judea." It appeared on new Nikon icons and crosses, old versions were destroyed.

At the very beginning of the schism, heated debates began about whether it was permissible to depict this inscription. Archdeacon Ignatius from the Solovetsky Monastery wrote a petition to Tsar Alexei on this occasion, rejecting the new inscription and demanding the return of the old I X C C denoting “Jesus Christ King of Glory.” In his opinion, the old inscription speaks of Christ as God and Creator, who took his place in heaven after the Ascension. And the new one speaks of him as an ordinary person residing on earth. But Feodosius Vasiliev, deacon of the Red Yam Church and his followers, on the contrary, defended the “Pilate inscription” for a long time. They were called Fedoseevtsy - a special branch of the Old Believers. All other Old Believers use more ancient inscription in making their crosses to this day.

Baptism and procession

Among the Old Believers it is only possible full immersion into water, carried out three times. But after Nikon’s reforms, it became possible either partial immersion during baptism, or even just dousing.

The religious procession used to take place according to the sun, clockwise or salting. After the reform, during rituals it is performed counterclockwise. This caused strong discontent in its time; people began to consider it a new darkness.

Criticism of the Old Believers

Old Believers are often criticized for their strict adherence to all dogmas and rituals. When the symbolism and some features of the old rituals were changed, this caused strong discontent, riots and uprisings. Followers of the old faith could even prefer martyrdom to accepting the new rules. Who are the Old Believers? Fanatics or selfless people defending their faith? This is difficult for a modern person to understand.

How can you doom yourself to death because of one letter that was changed or thrown out or, on the contrary, added? Many authors of articles write that symbolism and all these small, in their opinion, changes after Nikon’s reform are only external in nature. But is it correct to think so? Of course, the main thing is faith, and not just blind adherence to all rules and customs. But where is the limit of these permissible changes?

If you follow this logic, then why do we need these symbols at all, why call ourselves Orthodox, why do we need baptism and other rituals, if they can be so easily changed by simply gaining power, while killing hundreds of people who disagree. Why is such an Orthodox faith needed if it is not at all different from Protestant or Catholic? After all, all these customs and rituals exist for a reason, for the sake of their blind execution. It was not for nothing that people kept knowledge about these rituals for so many years, passed them on from mouth to mouth, and copied books by hand, because this is a huge amount of work. Perhaps they saw something more behind these rituals, something that modern man is unable to understand and sees this as unnecessary external paraphernalia.

Peace to this House!!! My thoughts were confused by what had been going on in my head for a long time, so I started to write with meaning, so that they would understand, but everything was mixed up. I know for sure that many are wealthy (rich in money and their quantity) and live in peace with their family, they are all grateful to the Lord and do as their ancestors bequeathed. When they have problems, they drop everything they are doing and hold fast, all the problems go away on their own, and then they continue to live the same life as they lived. I know many people who did not honor the faith of their ancestors, they are neither here nor there, but when trouble came and they began to fast as they should, prayers also helped them, after which the majority returned to their previous level of atheism, or to the previous level. returned, I don’t know anyone who can challenge this, but you. The Almighty forces guide each of you, but not everyone follows the right path or to the end as expected. Knowledge and technology are given to make your life easier, but the fact is that people use it incorrectly, mostly atheists, who sooner or later turn earthly paradise into hellish earth. I’m not going to point my finger at these places, you already know them well, try to clean them today, the state is anti-God, whose entire savings will not be able to do this. As it has been since time immemorial, the Right People have been presiding and purifying with their deeds, so it remains, but there are few of them left on earth and they leave these places far away. As far as your church is concerned, it has not been God’s for a long time; there are only a few places where the Lord remains. I’ll explain how to find it and how to distinguish it from incorrect places. First of all, any temple for people where the power of the Lord is, it is not built haphazardly. The Temple of the Heavens of the Lord is built only by people who are pure and after a long fast, during construction they should not have any evil deeds, much less have a different religion. So the hand-paintings in it and those who have the right to write, just like the construction of a temple after a long fast, are not illuminated photographs. Which of you will show such a temple? Some idol fans today. The icons from the shop are just pieces of paper with pictures and will only intoxicate you with the anti-God that it is enough to baptize. You are all funny today. Old Believers have clean prayer houses, the Holy Spirit is present in them. Not one person hears what the Elders say. The population has no sense these days. Christians have long ago left the Lord. Today the majority are not atheists, not Children of the Lord. They separate themselves from doing the right things. Slaves have only Slaves today. They turned themselves from the children of the Lord into Slaves. You all have work, slaves. It's not a matter of talent. Not one person wants to work, but rather work in a queue. Laugh at you or you yourself will laugh. Pray, ask for the King of the Lord to come, I can’t come, I’m held in chains. I speak on his behalf. To the Glory of God's Heaven. The Lord is with us.

Old Believers are often called Old Believers (schismatics) or vice versa. It doesn’t even occur to many people that we are talking about completely different directions. “Old Believers and Old Believers: what is the difference between these people?” – the ignorant ask themselves.

How did the confusion arise?

Old Believers and Old Believers have different worldviews. Not very educated media workers created confusion in terminology by making these words synonymous. Their incorrect use was also facilitated by the fact that the schismatics were forced to flee to Belovodye and Primorye after Nikon’s reforms. The Old Believers gave the Old Believers shelter and helped them hide from persecution. These people were connected not by a common faith, but by belonging to the same ethnic group.

Old Believers and Old Believers: differences

To understand what the difference is between these people, you first need to understand what worldview the representatives of one and the other direction belong to. Old Believers are Russian Christians who refused to accept the reforms of Patriarch Nikon. People who did not want to obey the new rules were called schismatics. They were persecuted and oppressed in every possible way. Many families were forced to flee abroad. Modern descendants of the Old Believers can be found even in Brazil. Only in the twentieth century did they begin to treat “apostates” more leniently. In 1905, Nicholas II signed a decree according to which the politically incorrect word “schismatic” was replaced by the more neutral “Old Believer.”

The reluctance of part of the country's Orthodox population to accept Nikon's innovations was associated with significant changes in the conduct of rituals. These changes, according to schismatics, desecrated the truth:

• In the Old Believer books, the name of the Savior is written with one letter “and”, that is, Jesus. After the reforms, the name received its modern spelling.
• Before Nikon’s innovations, people were supposed to cross themselves with two fingers. According to the new canon, the banner of the cross was applied with three fingers.

• The reforming patriarch decreed that one could only walk around the church counterclockwise.
• Under Nikon they were rewritten liturgical books. Differences appeared not only in the conduct of religious services. Some terms have been replaced: the word "orthodox" has been replaced by "Orthodox". There were other significant changes.

Old Believers are those who adhere to the pre-Christian worldview. These people believe in the Slavic Vedas. Followers of tradition should not be considered backward, ignorant people. Their worldview is much larger than that of Christians. Old Believers are closer to nature and better understand its laws.

Schismatics, like any Christians, separate the Creator and what he created. The pre-Christian tradition connects man with nature and forces him to return to it. Connecting with the natural environment is necessary for self-knowledge and finding your place in this world. The Vedas are often called not a religion, but ancient wise knowledge. According to the Old Believer calendar, the inhabitants of the planet are currently going through an era called the night of Svarog. This is one of the most difficult periods in human history, characterized by all kinds of disasters and crises. From the point of view of the Slavic Vedas, everything that is happening in the world today is quite understandable and should not cause surprise or bewilderment.

The knowledge we acquire at school does not always find its application in life. Giving ready material, the teacher cannot always answer the student’s question. For example: “Old Believers and Old Believers: what is the difference?” These terms are not synonymous. Knowing your native history will help avoid misunderstandings.

In modern evil times, the “shepherds” are filled with love for everyone without exception, including the enemies of Christ. They are ready to merge in prayerful communion with the enemies of Christ and the persecutors of the Orthodox Church, dragging the entire Orthodox people with them into the abyss.

The problem is this: having grabbed the tops, i.e. telling you about the “Hundred-Glavy Council” - at which, allegedly, it was decided to be baptized with two fingers, about Nikon’s reform, according to which the Patriarch reprinted the liturgical books, prayers with errors and with his own corrections... and decided to be baptized with three fingers; telling about how they were persecuted by the authorities (and, for sure, how they burned themselves will be missed, because modern people will not clearly understand this); about the local council of the Russian Orthodox Church in 1971, at which the anathema on all Old Believers was lifted; then the conclusion will be clear: here they are, the true zealots of the pure Orthodox faith and guardians of uncorrupted rituals.
But having dug a little deeper, everything will immediately fall into place - why the councils imposed an anathema on the Old Believers - after all, this is the highest punishment in the church. Why are such authoritative saints as Seraphim of Sarov, John of Kranstadt, Ignatius Brianchaninov, Theophan the Recluse and many other saints who labored in the field of God were against the wisdom of the Old Believer. And why the Russian government was forced to persecute these crazed zealots. To understand all this, we must turn to the origins of the Old Believers.
The origins lead us to the earliest Russian schism, the Kapitonovschina, in the 30s of the 17th century. So, at the head of the schismatics was the rebellious elder, the builder of the monastery, the monk Kapiton. “By natural signs” he predicted the imminent coming of the Antichrist. In order to save himself from the coming misfortune, Kapito proposed to renounce the Holy Sacraments and the Church. Through the strictness of monastic life, the Trinity builder attracted many like-minded people to his side. In 1639 Kapiton was arrested and exiled to Tobolsk, from where he fled in the early 40s. 17th century to their homeland. Among Kapiton’s students there was a certain great and wise Vavila, about whom later in one of the schismatic works it was said: “being a foreigner by birth, of the Luthor faith, he studied verbatim and writing for quite some time in the most glorious academy in Paris, he was skilled in rhetoric, logic, philosophy and theology; knew Latin, Greek, Hebrew and Slavic languages.”

We can only guess in what ways and for what purpose this Frenchman (heretic), a graduate of the Paris Sorbonne, a contemporary of Cardinal Richelieu, who knows not only learned languages, but also Hebrew, and, most surprisingly, Slavic, ended up in the forests near Vyazniki. But it was there that Vavila, “putting heavy chains on himself,” took the views of his teacher Capito to the extreme and began to preach mass self-immolations.

Self-immolation. After the death of Kapiton, a split occurred in the community into the so-called “Yukhra” charter, which did not approve of suicide, and the “Ksharsky” charter, which radically approached the issue of suicide deaths for faith. “At the head of this direction were Vavila the Young (a French heretic) and Elder Leonidas. The facts of their active participation in mass and individual suicides were revealed by the investigative commission of I.S. Prozorovsky in Vyazniki. During the trial, a connection was proven between the Vologda suicides of the “Kapiton” and Vavila Molodoy...”

The leaders of the “Kshara” charter (Vavila Molodoy, Leonid, etc.) behave like people who have already escaped Last Judgment. They “saved” other people from him. The elders of this charter burned, drowned, and starved people, but they themselves did not even think of following the example of their victims.

By 1667, the “Kapitonism” had almost completely destroyed itself, since mass self-immolations occurred during the “apocalypse” of 1666. Among the survivors, positions on uniting with other movements of ancient church piety began to strengthen. The connecting link between the Old Believers and the “Kapiton” was the preaching of the main “zealot” of piety, Avvakum, of suicide for the faith. “Those who burned their bodies and betrayed their souls into the hand of God, the self-willed martyrs rejoice with Christ forever and ever.”

So the main authority and ideologist of the schism is Avvakum (among the Old Believers he is canonized as a saint and is commemorated in everyday morning and evening prayers), while in captivity in Pustoozersk, already in the 1670s he actually blessed self-immolations and thereby contributed to their spread. Suicide was declared voluntary martyrdom and thereby justified. Among other methods, preference was given to “death by fire,” and to encourage this particular type of self-destruction, along with the motive of martyrdom, another one was invented. Self-immolation began to be interpreted as a second baptism, “baptism by fire.”

Once upon a time, during the era of persecution in the Roman Empire, such “voluntary martyrs” became Gnostic sectarians, condemned for this by the Universal Church; Now they have become Russian Orthodox Christians, from the faithful children of the Church, turned heretics...

Dissenters often say that self-immolations were a response to persecution. But, as we indicated above, this is pure fiction; for the burning began long before the official persecution. Not counting the self-immolation of the “capitons”, which began in the 1660s, the first mass self-immolation, in which 2,000 people became victims, was organized in the Nizhny Novgorod district in 1672 year, that is, self-destruction began 13 years before the start of the persecution.

The law on the execution of the most dangerous dissenters (see “The Twelve Articles of Princess Sophia - a law on adherents of the old faith, which consisted of 12 points, 1685 year.")

In the book by D.I. Sapozhnikov “Self-immolation in the Russian schism from the second half of the 17th century.” detailed information about 117 self-immolations is provided, and the appendix contains their “List by year for the period 1667.” to 1784”, as well as “List of the leaders of the schism and their associates found in the description of self-immolations”. Let us cite just one case of self-immolation out of many.

In 1682-1684. burning began in Pomorie, in the town of Dory, where a certain priestless Andronik settled. He managed to organize a whole series of self-immolations and at the same time remain alive. The priest Euphrosynus writes about these burning areas in his “Reflective Scripture.” The first time, 70 people were burned, the second time - 17, the third - 350, and in total 437 people died, among whom, as always, the majority were old women and children. In 1684, in the same Dora, Andronik prepared about 200 more people for self-immolation, but the authorities found out about this, and archers were sent there to prevent the atrocity. Andronik and his victims locked themselves in the refectory, defended themselves, and then set the house on fire. The archers, having cut down the doors, rushed in, whoever they managed to grab, pulled out of the fire: 47 people burned, of the 153 rescued, 59 soon died from wounds and burns. 82 people saved from death by the archers brought repentance for blaspheming the four-pointed cross and opposing the Church. Andronik did not repent and according to the verdict of the Boyar Duma of April 8, 1684. was burned. The royal decree reads: “That monk Andronicus for his actions against the holy and life-giving cross of Christ and the Church of His holy repulsiveness should be executed and burned.”

Since the archers saved people from the fire and did not burn them, one can think that they were sent to Dory, where 437 people had already been burned, not for a “mass punitive operation,” but to prevent another burning. They did everything they could to save people. But modern priests consider the hero the possessed Andronicus, who persuaded more than 500 people to go to a terrible death, and they call the Streltsy, who saved 153 people, “the servants of Satan” and “the hands of the Antichrist.”

Habakkuk. Avvakum is the main spiritual figure of the Old Believers. As we already mentioned above: Avvakum was canonized as a saint by the Old Believers. The best person to help us understand is Avvakum himself, or rather his letters addressed to the king and his followers.

In the Fifth Petition, Avvakum tells Alexei Mikhailovich a vision that happened to him while in Lent he lay on his bed without eating for ten days, reproaching himself for the fact that on such great days he dispenses with the “rule” and only reads prayers using the rosary. In the second week, his body grew greatly and spread widely. First the tongue grew, then the teeth, then the arms and legs, and finally it became wide and spacious and spread over the entire earth, and then God included heaven and earth and all creation in it. “You see, Autocratic? - he continues, “You own Russian land in freedom, but the Son of God conquered both heaven and earth for me for being in prison.” It is not surprising that, realizing such enormous power of his, Habakkuk was not averse to entering into an argument and bickering with the Son of God himself. After he was severely beaten by order of Pashkov for his intercession on behalf of two widows, he, according to him, came to mind: “Why did you, son of God, allow him to kill me in such a painful way? I became your widow! Who will judge between me and you? - he asked in the words of Job. “When I was stealing, you didn’t insult me ​​like that, but now we don’t know that I sinned.” Having finally lost hope that Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich would support old faith, Avvakum began to bully him in the same way as he bullied Nikonians in general. Maliciously depicting the fate in hell of the wicked Tsar Maximian and clearly hinting at the fate of Alexei Mikhailovich himself, he exclaims: “Poor, poor, crazy king! What have you done to yourself?... Well, disappear into the ground, son of a whore! It’s enough to torture Christians!”

Obscene interpretation of holy texts is found throughout Habakkuk’s correspondence. So in the letter to Simeon we read:

“Is there a Maximian under you, a feather bed and a head? And the eunuchs fan your health so that the flies do not bite the great sovereign? How the hell are you walking around there, are the sleeping bags being timid, are they wiping the shit in your fiery bogeyman? The Holy Spirit said to me: no, those people there are already timid with you - they all stayed here, but you don’t even gray the food, the worms themselves are eating the great sovereign. Poor, poor king! What have you done to yourself?

Here there is already obvious blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, who, according to Habakkuk, simply speaks obscenities.

“God willing, before Christ’s judgment, I will smash Nikon’s snout. The son of a whore, the dog, has embarrassed our land. Yes, I’ll gouge out his eyes, and I’ll push him behind his back: well, go into the darkness, it’s not fitting for you to appear to Christ in my light. And I will order Tsar Alexei to be appointed by Christ at the trial. I need to soar with whispers.”

“Nicholas the miracle worker endures, but we are weak: at least he turned his head back and turned his face around Moscow, let him walk around Moscow like that.”

“This is what you, Fyodor, wrote in your damn letters, God gave them into my hands, and you wanted to send them away, a servant of God, to turmoil and destruction... Just give me time, in Christ I will have Nikonian, your beloved, in the hands of the same as you, whore’s children, I’ll hang you all around the oak tree.

Well, to hell with you, you are not needed holy trinity bastards, good for nothing.”

In this tone, as can be seen quite often and with obscenities, all his proud and pompous letters to all those who do not agree with the opinion, during his lifetime, of “saint” Habakkuk.

“The Trinity is an ineffable being, three names, three persons, triholy, tripartite ( This is an obvious mistake, since it contradicts the second member of the creed about consubstantiality: “... born, and not created, of one essence with the Father, by whom all things were.”), tripartite, triune, tripartinal. One being in three parts.

But from written notebooks and from Nikonian whore books you will not understand the truth about the Holy Trinity.”

Venerable John of Damascus: “The hypostases of the Holy Deity are consubstantial. It is impossible to say that the Father is of one essence, and the Son is different, but (both) are one and the same. In the same way, we believe in one Holy Spirit, as consubstantial and coeternal. For it is only by their hypostatic properties that the three holy hypostases differ from each other, inseparably distinguished not by essence, but by distinctive property each hypostasis...”

From this consideration it is very clear that Habakkuk fell into a destructive heresy. From a historical point of view, this heresy repeats the teaching of the Arians, who reproached the Council of Nicaea precisely for the fact that it included in its Confession the words: essence, consubstantial. It is also noteworthy that the Arians were marked with two fingers, although for a slightly different reason.

Editing books. After the above example, when Habakkuk swallows an elephant, when he does not interpret dogma correctly, and stubbornly clings to the rearrangement of “Az” “I” and other phrases and letters in the books. From here it becomes clearer how right the Old Believers are in their beliefs. So, for example, in the Sunday Canon of the 6th tone we read: “The Trinity that rules all, the three-component nature... bring back the singing with a cry...” (7 Canto. Trinity). Same thing in canon To the All-Merciful Savior: “A three-part nature, a being inseparable, uncreated, without beginning, and essential” (Song 7. Trinity).

It also becomes clear here that the old service books definitely needed serious editing. It was not Habakkuk himself who invented this heresy about the three compositions of God; After all, he himself testifies that it was taken from the Trinity hymns. And this once again shows that the Russian Church is on the verge of heresy.

Perstadion. In their doctrine of double-fingering, the Old Believers rely on Stoglav, for this is the only book where, as it seems to them, the doctrine of double-fingered addition is deduced.

Well, let's turn to this book. Although the original of Stoglav has not survived, and under the remaining manuscripts there is no signature of the king or even the bishops anywhere, and the remaining copies are replete with discrepancies and obviously apocryphal inserts, however, we will try to select the very essence, discarding contradictory and unclear points.

Chapter 31 tells about the sign of the cross: “as it befits, the bishop and the priest bless with the hand, and signify the rest Orthodox Christian and worship." Already from the very title of this chapter it is clear that there are two parts in it: about the blessing of the saint and about the simple sign of the cross. " Thumb Yes, joining the two lower fingers together, and joining the upper finger with the middle one, bending it slightly, so bless the saint and the priest,” This is a blessing by Jesus Christ or the name of the Lord, which is appropriate only for clergy, as those who have taken upon themselves the image of Christ.

Reference: The shepherds of the Orthodox Church give the believers a blessing in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and for this they fold the fingers of their right hand so that they represent the first and last letters of the blessed name ICXC, i.e. I Jesus Christ, in particular, the second and third fingers, otherwise the index and middle, copulate, so that the second, extended, represents the letter I, and the third, extended and slightly inclined, the letter C, the first, or thumb, finger copulates with two the last ones so that, crossing the fourth finger, it represents the letter X, and the fifth finger, or little finger, extended and slightly inclined, represents the letter C with them - this finger formation is called a nominal one.

Distortion of dogmas. But is this opinion correct?

From the “Word against the Unholy and Unsanctified Apostate”

In the second part of the chapter, at the very end, we read literally the following: “I have three fingers together, in the trinity image, God the Father, the Son, God the Holy Spirit, not three gods, but One. God in the Trinity of names is divided, but the Divinity is one, the Father is not begotten, but the Son is begotten, and not created, the Spirit proceeds, three in one Divinity. One strength, one
Honor to the Deity, one bow from all creation, from angels and from people, such is the decree with that three finger.

Having two fingers is inclined, and not extended, and the decree thus imagines two natures - Divinity and humanity, God according to Divinity, and man according to humanity, and in both is perfect, the upper finger forms Divinity, and the lower one humanity, having previously descended from the highest our salvation, the same death will be interpreted: for the heavens have bowed down for our salvation.”

It is very clear here that we're talking about not about the sign that in the first part “he stretched out his fingers, bending a little,” but about the other, “having two fingers is inclined, and not stretched out.” And this phrase clearly indicates that there should be three fingers outstretched (i.e., facing upward), and two “inclined, not outstretched” I.e. here we are clearly talking about the familiar three-fingeredness. Let us further assume that the Old Believer is right, and three fingers are at the bottom, and two at the top, in an inclined position as stated.

Then the question arises: if both fingers are bent, then which of them forms the Divinity, and which humanity (you can even do the experiment yourself)? – The answer seems insoluble. But if we bend the two outer fingers, as it should be, then it will immediately become clear that the ring finger (and not by chance, for the Divine is incomprehensible) forms the Divinity, and the little finger, as the smallest of all fingers, humanity. Yes, and it is surprising if humanity was higher than the Divinity, higher than the Holy Trinity.

However, the Old Believers themselves sometimes strongly oppose Stoglav, for in chapter 27 he commands: “Which holy books will be... the essence will be found to be incorrect, described, and you would correct all those holy books from good translations together”...

Hence the dislike of the Old Believers for the blessed Tsar John, as well as for all kings and royal power in general.

Holy relics. The holy relics of the ascetics of the 11th-12th centuries, resting incorruptibly in the Kiev caves, and namely the Monk Elijah of Murom and Joseph the Much-Sick, whose first three fingers of the right hand are connected, although unequally, but together, and the last two, the ring and little fingers, are bent to the palm , and St. Spyridon, whose three first fingers are even connected completely equally.

And in vain do the Old Believers try to interpret that the right hand of Ilya Muromets and Joseph the Many-Sick (whose three fingers are connected unequally) as a two-fingered addition.

After all, if you make the sign of the cross as the Old Believers understand it, referring to Stoglav, (“The thumb and two lower fingers are joined together in one, and the upper finger is united with the middle one, stretched out slightly bent...”), then the lower two fingers will not be bent to the palms, as is undeniably noticeable on the relics of St. ascetics.

Also, the incorruptible right hand of John Chrysostom clearly shows a three-fingered constitution.

1. right hand of John Chrysostom

2. Hand of John the Baptist

Cancellation of oaths to old rituals.

Metropolitans Sergius of Starogorodsky and Anthony Khrapovetsky. The participation of these church leaders in the history of the revival of the Old Believers can be traced very clearly. So back in 1912. The All-Russian Edinoverie Congress took place in St. Petersburg. The center of the movement at this time was the Edinoverie community of St. Petersburg, based in the St. Nicholas Church, where Andrei Ukhtomsky’s brother was the headman. Two prominent figures of the Synodal Church actively participated in the work of the congress - Archbishop Sergius (Starogorodsky), the future Patriarch of Moscow and All Rus', and Metropolitan Anthony (Khrapovitsky) of Volyn, the future Metropolitan of Kiev, Chairman of the ROCOR.

Subsequently, when these bishops received much-coveted power, their Old Believer sympathies were expressed as follows. So April 10 (23), 1929 a Resolution of the Patriarchal Holy Synod, chaired by Sergius of Starogorodsky, was issued, called “Acts of the Archpastors,” on the abolition of the oaths of the Moscow Council of 1656 and the Great Moscow Council of 1667, which they imposed on the old church rites. This decree also abolished other conciliar oaths of the 17th century . This document openly declared the legitimacy of the old liturgical rites, including two-fingered fingers, in accordance with the books of the pre-Nikon press (containing heretical dogmas). And, as a consequence of this, the conclusion is the illegality of the oaths imposed by the councils in the 17th century, both on the rituals themselves and on the believers who adhered to them.

According to the testimony of Archbishop of Geneva and Western Europe (ROCOR) Anthony (Bartoshevich, 1911-1996), Metropolitan Anthony (Khrapovitsky) did the same: When Metropolitan Anthony found himself abroad, he wrote an appeal to the Old Believers. And he wrote heartily and with love: until now you have been persecuted, and we are, as it were, in the position of persecutors, the official Church, and now, he says, we are persecuted just like you.

Nikodim Rotov. In 1971, at the Local Council, the initiator of the abolition of the “oaths of 1667” was Metropolitan Nikodim Rotov (First Mentor of the current Patriarch Kirill Gundyaev), known for his ecumenical activities. He proposed, as a Council resolution, to repeat in a modified form the Resolution of the Holy Synod of 1929. It was based on his report that the Council adopted a resolution on the “abolishing of oaths.” The Acts of the Local Council “On the abolition of oaths on its old rites and on those who adhere to them” dated June 2, 1971 stated: We, who constitute the Local Council of the Russian Orthodox Church, are equal in dignity and significance to the Moscow Council of 1656 and the Great Moscow Council of 1667 g., having considered the issue of the oaths imposed by these councils from the theological, liturgical, canonical and historical sides, we solemnly determine in the glory of the All-Holy Name of our Lord Jesus Christ:
1) Approve the resolution of the Patriarchal Holy Synod of April 23 (10), 1929 on the recognition of old Russian rites as salutary, like new rites, and equal to them.
2) Approve the resolution of the Patriarchal Holy Synod of April 23 (10), 1929 on the rejected and supposedly not former derogatory expressions relating to the old rites, and in particular, to double-fingered, wherever they were found and whoever were uttered.
3) To approve the resolution of the Patriarchal Holy Synod of April 23 (10), 1929 on the abolition of the oaths of the Moscow Council of 1656 and the Great Moscow Council of 1667, imposed by them on the old Russian rituals and on the Orthodox Christians who adhere to them, and consider these oaths as not exes."

(Ep. Kirill (Gundyaev), now Patriarch, M. Nikodim (Rotov) - ecumenist, A.I. Osipov. - ecumenist, develops heresies already condemned by the Ecumenical Councils, and now already a schismatic - m. Filaret (Denisenko),)

Bishops' Council of the ROCOR. Also in 2000, the Council of Bishops of the ROCOR, on behalf of the Russian Church, brought repentance to the Old Believers: “We deeply regret the cruelties that were inflicted on the adherents of the Old Rite, about those persecutions by civil authorities, which were inspired by some of our predecessors in the hierarchy of the Russian Church..."
Reverend Paisiy Velichkovsky on the abolition of vows.

“An oath or anathema against those who oppose the Catholic Church, i.e. on those who are baptized with two fingers or who resist anything else, having been collectively imposed by the Eastern Patriarchs, the grace of Christ will remain firm, unshakable and insoluble until the end of the age.

You also ask: was the imposed anathema subsequently resolved by any Eastern Cathedral or not?

I answer: could there be such a Council, with the exception of some one contrary to God and the Holy Church, which would gather to refute the truth and confirm lies? There will never be such an evil Council in the Church of Christ.

You also ask: can any bishops, apart from the Council and the consent and will of the Eastern Patriarchs, authorize such an oath?

I answer: it is impossible; There is no discord with God, but peace. Know for sure that all bishops, upon their ordination, receive the same grace of the Holy Spirit and are obliged, like the apple of their eye, to preserve the purity and integrity of the Orthodox faith, as well as all the apostolic traditions and rules of the holy apostles, Ecumenical and Local Councils, and God-bearing fathers , which the Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church contains.

From the same Holy Spirit they received the power to bind and decide according to the order that the Holy Spirit established through the holy apostles in the holy Church. To destroy the apostolic traditions and church rules- the bishops did not receive such power from the Holy Spirit, therefore, it is impossible for either the bishops or the Eastern Patriarchs to resolve the above-mentioned anathema on the opponents of the Conciliar Church, as correctly and in accordance with the holy Council, and if anyone attempted to do this, it would be disgusting to God and the holy Church. You also ask: if none of the bishops can resolve this anathema without the Eastern patriarchs, then was it not resolved by the Eastern ones?
I answer: not only is it impossible for any bishop without the Eastern Patriarchs, but also for the Eastern Patriarchs themselves to resolve this oath, as has already been said enough, for such an anathema is eternally insoluble...”

Fragmentation of the Old Believers. From the time of the schism to the present day, the Old Believers have divided themselves into many parts - rumors, agreements that are in no way inferior to each other in “truth”. Here are some of them: Kerzhen “elders”, Beglopopovsky consent, Belakrinitsky hierarchy, Novozybkovsky hierarchy, Pomeranian consent, Filippov consent, Fedoseev consent, Spasov consent. I wonder which Old Believers the Russian and foreign hierarchs blame? Old Believers of what agreement or sense? If they repent and ask for forgiveness from the Old Believers-bezpopovtsy Pomeranian consent, then they must agree to recognize themselves as followers of the Antichrist.

Subversive activities of Old Believers in Russian statehood. Since the beginning of the schism, for the Old Believers there is not only no true hierarchy, but also no statehood, but the fact that there are either Antichrists or Antichrist servants or Antichrist hands or forerunners of the Antichrist. With such speculation, of course, there was no talk of any patriotism. When it is not the Tsar, but the Antichrist, not the minister, but the Antichrist’s servant.

So, for example, writes the hierarch of the Belokrinitsky consent T. Seredinov: “as a result of the Time of Troubles, the most unprincipled and greedy group came to power, relying on the oprichnina noble rags and rallying around the Romanov boyar clan. This clan, without any dynastic rights, went to power without choosing any means... The strong church began to interfere with the Romanovs... They decided to blow it up from the inside, for which they found Nikon, a simple man from the national outskirts."

Knowing the attitude of the Old Believers to Russian statehood, other countries willingly took advantage of this. When they could not crush from the outside, with the support of the peasants of the “old faith” they tried from within.
Here is a list of centuries-old riots and riots with the participation of Old Believers:

1670-1671. Razinism. Revolt of the Cossacks - “Old Believers” led by Stepan Razin.

1668-1676. Capture of the Solovetsky Monastery by the Kapitons and the Razins.

1681. Mutiny of the Streltsy in Moscow under the leadership of schismatics.

1708-1710. Bulavinsky revolt and the departure of the “Old Believers” Cossacks to Turkey. (Subsequently, these Cossacks fought on the side of Turkey and its European allies).

1765. “This year, a crowd of schismatics, numbering 23 people, captured the Zelensky Monastery, drove out the monks from there and locked themselves in its high walls. This disaster destroyed a lot of church property, especially books and manuscripts” (St. Ignatius).

1771. “Plague riot” in Moscow. Murder of Archbishop Ambrose.

1773-1774. Pugachevshchina. Revolt of the Yak Cossacks - “Old Believers”

These riots led by schismatics, as a rule, arose not in the central regions of Russia with the original Orthodox population, but on the outskirts populated by the Golytba and foreigners, where, in addition to the Old Believers, the population traditionally harbored some kind of dissatisfaction with the Orthodox Church and the Muscovite kingdom.

A characteristic feature of the riots was imposture. The impostor king always promised to restore the “old faith.” Razin's revolt was accompanied by the promotion of the false Tsarevich Alexei, who had died shortly before.

Pugachev declared himself Emperor Peter III.

That is why all those people who followed the impostors could not be stopped even by the church, which anathematized all the rebels and those who help them, because they were not children of this church, but established their own faith and their own state. But in fact, they were only a weapon of Western countries to destroy Russia.

It also happened during the revolution of 1917. Foreign freemason agents had all the same popular support in the person of the “Old Believers” who happily helped to overthrow the Antichrist from the Russian throne and restore the “old faith” and “people’s” power.

Holy Fathers about the Old Believers.

St. Seraphim of Sarov. Stop your nonsense! How can you escape without a helmsman? (Words of St. Seraphim spoken to a schismatic.)
One day, 4 people from the zealots of the Old Believers, residents of the village of Pavlova, Gorbatovsky district, came to the monk to ask about the two-fingered addition with confirmation of the truth of the old believer’s answer by some miracle or sign.

They had just crossed the threshold of the cell, and did not have time to say their thoughts, when the elder approached them and took the first of them by the right hand, put his fingers in a three-fingered formation according to the rite of the Orthodox Church and, thus, baptizing him. gave the following speech: “This is the Christian folding of the cross! So pray and tell others. This composition was handed down from St. apostles, and the double-fingered habit is contrary to the holy statutes. I ask and pray you: go to the Greek-Russian Church: it is in all the glory and power of God! Like a ship with many riggings, sails and a great helm, she is guided by the Holy Spirit. Its good helmsmen are the teachers of the Church, the archpastors are the successors of the apostles. And your chapel is like a small boat without a helm or oars; she is moored with a rope to the ship of our Church, floats behind her, flooded by the waves, and would certainly drown if she were not tied to the ship.”

At another time, one Old Believer came to him and asked:

- Tell me, Elder of God, which faith is better: the current church faith or the old one?

“Leave your nonsense,” answered Father Seraphim, “our life is the sea, St. Our Orthodox Church is a ship, and the helmsman is the Savior Himself. If, with such a helmsman, people, due to their sinful weakness, have difficulty crossing the sea of ​​life and not everyone is saved from drowning, then where are you striving with your little boat and on what do you base your hope of being saved without a helmsman?

One winter, a sick woman was brought on a sleigh to the monastery cell of Fr. Seraphim and this was reported to him. Despite the multitude of people crowding in the hallway, Fr. Seraphim asked to bring her to him. The patient was all hunched over, her knees were brought to her chest. They carried her into the elder’s home and laid her on the floor. O. Seraphim locked the door and asked her:

-Where are you from, mother?

- From the Vladimir province.

- How long have you been sick?

- Three years and a half.

– What is the cause of your illness?

– I was previously, father, of the Orthodox faith, but they gave me in marriage to an Old Believer. For a long time I did not lean towards their faith - and I was still healthy. Finally, they persuaded me: I changed the cross to two fingers and did not go to church. After that, in the evening, I went out into the yard to do some household chores; there one animal seemed fiery to me, and even scorched me; I fell in fright and began to break and writhe. Quite a bit of time passed, the family missed me, looked for me, went out into the yard and found me - I was lying. They carried me into the room. I've been sick ever since.

“I understand...” the elder answered. “Do you believe in St. again?” Orthodox Church?

“Now I believe again, father,” answered the patient.

Then Fr. Seraphim folded his fingers in the Orthodox manner, put a cross on himself and said: “Cross yourself like this in the name of the Holy Trinity.”

“Father, I would be glad,” the patient answered, “but I can’t use my hands.”

O. Seraphim took from the lamp Mother of God He applied tender oil and anointed the sick woman’s chest and hands. Suddenly she began to straighten out, even her joints began to crack, and immediately she received perfect health. The people standing in the vestibule, having seen the miracle, spread throughout the monastery, and especially in the hotel, that Fr. Seraphim healed the sick woman.

When this event ended, she came to Fr. Seraphim, one of the Diveyevo sisters, Fr. Seraphim told her:

“It was not the poor Seraphim, mother, who healed her, but the Queen of Heaven.” “Then he asked: “Mother, don’t you have anyone in your family who doesn’t go to church?”

“There are no such people, father,” answered the sister. “And my parents and relatives all pray with the double-fingered cross.”

“Ask them on my behalf,” said Fr. Seraphim - so that they fold their fingers in the name of the Holy Trinity.

“I told them about this many times, father, but they didn’t listen.”

- Listen, ask on my behalf. Start with your brother, who loves me, he will be the first to agree.

– Did you have any deceased relatives who prayed with the two-fingered cross?

“Unfortunately, everyone in our family prayed like that.”

“Even though they were virtuous people,” Fr. Seraphim thought for a moment. – And they will be bound: the Holy Orthodox Church does not accept this cross... Do you know their graves?

The sister named the graves of those she knew and where they were buried.

- Go, mother, to their graves, make three bows and pray to the Lord that He will resolve them in eternity.

My sister did just that. She also told the living that they should accept the Orthodox folding of their fingers in the name of the Holy Trinity, and they definitely obeyed the voice of Fr. Seraphim, for they knew that he was a saint of God and understood the mysteries of St. Christ's faith." (“Soulful Reading” 1867)

Similar examples from the holy life of St. There are a great many Seraphim of Sarov. You can bring and bring...

Now listen and be imbued with the spirit of the words of St. Demetrius, Metropolitan of Rostov, miracle worker, said by him about the same “Old Believers” — schismatics:

“Ole of the damned, our last times! - exclaims the saint. - For now the holy Church is greatly oppressed, diminished, both from external persecutors, and from internal schismatics, like, according to the Apostle, departed from us: but did not rage from us(1 John 2:19). And just because of the schism, the very true Catholic Apostolic Church has diminished, as if the true son of the Church can hardly be found anywhere: almost in every city some kind of special faith is invented, and already about faith, simple men and women, who are very ignorant of the true path, dogmatize and They teach, as they say about the addition of three fingers, that there is a wrong and a new cross, and in their stubbornness they stand in reproach, having despised and rejected the true teachers of the church...” (“The Life of St. Demetrius”).

Holy Dimitri Rostovsky is a great Orthodox writer, the author of “The Lives of the Saints,” and also wrote a wonderful, extensive work, “The Search for the Bryn Faith,” which revealed the pernicious spirit of schism. In this work, he clearly and convincingly proved that the faith of the schismatic Old Believers is wrong, their teaching is harmful to the soul, and their deeds are not pleasing to God.

“The Search for the Bryn Faith” is divided into three parts. In the first part, the saint resolves two questions: “is the faith of the schismatics right”? And “is their faith old”? Answering the first question, St. Demetrius easily proves that the schismatics do not have true faith, for their faith is limited to old books and icons, the eight-pointed cross, their own finger in the sign of the cross and the sevenfold number of prosphoras at the Liturgy - which does not constitute faith. Solving the second question, St. Demetrius says approximately the same thing as St. Theophan the Recluse in his sermons, that the faith of the schismatics is new or has renewed old heresies and errors. In the second part In the essay, the author points out that the teaching of the schismatic Old Believers, originating from impostor teachers, is 1) false, 2) heretical and 3) blasphemous. In the third part - about the deeds of the schismatics - it is proven that their apparently good deeds are spoiled by arrogance, vanity and hypocrisy, and then the evil and clearly lawless deeds of the schismatics are listed.

Re-reading our Holy Fathers of the Church, you never cease to be amazed and admire their inexhaustible power of faith and wisdom from the Holy Spirit. You never cease to be amazed at their simplicity and insight. And most of all, what evokes joy and admiration is their unshakable standing on the field of spiritual battle, guarding the purity of the Orthodox Faith. They give us spiritual and impenetrable protection from the attacks of schismatic Old Believers and various kinds of heretics. What other authorities do we need in order to stand in the Truth today and not succumb to demonic temptation, including demonic temptation from the apologists of the “Old Belief”? Or which of them can compare with Rev. Seraphim of Sarov; Holy Theophan the Recluse or St. Dimitri Rostovsky???

This is what St. writes about the schismatic Old Believers. Theophan the Recluse Vyshensky:

“...they (Old Believers - M.D.) keep saying that their rumors are the essence of ancient fatherly tradition. What ancient fatherly? These are all new inventions. The Ancient Tradition is contained by the Orthodox Church. We borrowed St. teaching from St. The Greek Orthodox Church, and all the holy books came to us from it. In ancient times these books contained everything as we do now. But 100 or 150 years before the blessed Patriarch Nikon and the most pious sovereign Alexei Mikhailovich, inexperienced scribes began to spoil them, and during that time they spoiled and spoiled everything and, finally, they spoiled everything so much that it was no longer possible to tolerate it. These damages included in the books were all new without exception. When they were later abolished and the books were put in the same form as they had been since ancient times, did that mean that something new had been introduced into the books?! They did not introduce new things, but returned them to the old ones. In our books now everything is the same as it is in the Greek and as in our ancient ones, after Equal-to-the-Apostles Prince Vladimir. Anyone who wants to, go and look at the old books in the Patriarchal Library in Moscow, and see for yourself. It became that we have the old books, and not the schismatics, and the ancient Tradition is also with us, and not with them. They have all new things, new books and new traditions. Let me explain this to you with an example: St. Sophia Cathedral in Kyiv - the oldest cathedral - was originally painted on the walls. Sometime later, no one remembers, they plastered over this painting and painted the temple again on new plaster. Old painting remained underneath. But recently, this new plaster and schedule were knocked off and the schedule that was under it, the oldest, was restored. What is it - they introduced a new thing into the St. Sophia Church or placed it in ancient look? Of course, they put it in its ancient form. Now the St. Sophia Church is in the same form as it was in ancient times, and not as it was 20 years ago. That’s how it was with books. When they threw out everything that was newly introduced, they did not update them, but returned them to the ancient ones, and our corrected books are truly ancient, and not schismatic - damaged.

So reflect back when one of the schismatics begins to explain to you that they have ancient books. Their books are no more than two, many three hundred years old; and our 1000 have more. And when they begin to assure that they have an ancient fatherly tradition, ask them where you have the ancient fatherly tradition - among the priests or the non-popovites, among the Filippovites or Fedoseevites, among the Spasov consent, or among the re-baptized people, or among the new Austrian rogues? Are there 10 ancient legends? After all, it is one. When they have more than one, it became, it is not ancient, but all human inventions. We have one, and it is completely in agreement with our most ancient Tradition, in agreement with the Greeks and all Orthodox Christians existing throughout the entire earth. We have agreement everywhere, but they have disagreement everywhere. In another village, three or four conversations, or even in one house, also happen - and they do not communicate with each other. Where is it? one Church Christ's? What kind of body of the Church is this when all the members disintegrated and went in different directions? Where is this one herd? and how can one say that the one, true, Divine Shepherd is their shepherd?

Judging by this, it is clear as day that they have no truth, no following of Christ, no Church. And when there is no Church, there is no salvation: for only in the Church is salvation, as in Noah’s ark. The Church of Christ has a priesthood. They have no priesthood; became, there is no Church. The Church of Christ has the Sacraments. They have no one to perform the Sacraments; therefore, they do not have a Church. How dare they still open their mouths and approach the Orthodox and seduce them! They say we want to save. How can we save when we ourselves are dying?! They themselves perish and drag others into destruction, rather than saving them. Note to yourself, salvation without grace is impossible; grace is not given without the Sacraments; The sacraments are not performed without the priesthood. No priesthood, no Sacraments; no Sacraments, no grace; no grace, no salvation.

Some of them say: now we have found the priesthood, or have planted the root of the priesthood. They planted a root, but it was rotten and barren. Judge for yourself: Ambrose, whom they lured to themselves, was bound by prohibition - bound by legal authority. The Lord promised this legal power: if you bind anyone on earth, they will be bound in heaven (Matthew 18:18). Therefore, Ambrose was also bound in heaven. If he is bound in heaven, then how could he, bound in heaven, communicate heavenly grace? Where did he get it?! He could not communicate it, and did not communicate it; and all those who were appointed to them, just as they were laymen, remained laymen, even though they are called priests and bishops. These are just names, like when children play and give themselves different titles - colonels, generals, commanders-in-chief.

Let them say it was banned. The elders allowed it. Wonderful thing! Ordinary laity allow the bishop and return to him the power to episcopate. Don’t you know that only the one who has the power to ordain can authorize? The old men did not have their sexton consecration; how could they return episcopal power to the bishop when this is the same as ordaining? They didn’t return it, and Ambrose remained banned, despite the ridiculous rituals performed on him. If it is prohibited, then grace is stopped in him; if it is stopped, then it could not be poured out on others. When, for example, water flows through a gutter, it overflows from it onto other bells and vessels; and when the gutter is locked, water will not flow through it and will not overflow to other places and things. So Ambrose, until he was banned, was like a trench overflowing water; and when he fell under the ban, he became like a dry trench, closed, and could no longer communicate to others the blessed water that he himself did not have. Thus, it is in vain that some of the schismatics deceive themselves and others, thinking that they have obtained the priesthood. They got names, but there was no case.

That's right, Orthodox Christians! Don't listen to these flattering words! There is no truth in them, but only lies and deception. They deceive themselves and plunge others into the same deception, but the truth of God is clear. She does not hide, but goes openly and presents all the evidence of her truth. We stand on solid rock, built on the foundation of the Apostle and Prophet, which is the cornerstone of Jesus Christ Himself (Eph. 2:20). With this in mind, stand courageously in the faith and boldly testify to its truth, and not only do not give in to schismatics, but, on the contrary, try to win them over to your side, sincerely convincing them that they have fallen into lies and delusions and are on the path of destruction, holding on to new things, which, through deception, are considered antiquated. Amen".

There are other wonderful sermons by St. Theophan the Recluse on the same topic about schismatic Old Believers. They complement the above words, seem to echo them and denounce the schismatic lies even more powerfully and completely.

The article is based on the book by A. Petrov (creator of the film about Ivan the Terrible “His Name is Ivan”), and his friend, A. Pavlov, “WHO ARE THE OLD BELIEVERS?”

IN last years an increasing number of our fellow citizens are interested in issues healthy image life, environmentally clean ways management, survival in extreme conditions, the ability to live in harmony with nature, spiritual improvement. In this regard, many turn to the thousand-year experience of our ancestors, who managed to develop the vast territories of present-day Russia and created agricultural, trade and military outposts in all remote corners of our Motherland.

Last but not least, in this case we are talking about the Old Believers - people who at one time settled not only the territories of the Russian Empire, but also brought the Russian language, Russian culture and Russian faith to the banks of the Nile, to the jungles of Bolivia, the wastelands of Australia and to the snow-capped hills of Alaska . The experience of the Old Believers is truly unique: they were able to preserve their religious and cultural identity in the most difficult natural and political conditions and not lose their language and customs. It is no coincidence that the famous hermit Agafya Lykova from the Lykov family of Old Believers is so well known all over the world.

However, not much is known about the Old Believers themselves. Some people believe that Old Believers are people with a primitive education who adhere to outdated farming methods. Others think that the Old Believers are people who profess paganism and worship the ancient Russian gods - Perun, Veles, Dazhdbog and others. Still others ask the question: if there are Old Believers, then there must be some kind of old faith? Read the answer to these and other questions regarding Old Believers in our article.

• Old and new faith
• Old Believers or Old Believers?
• What do Old Believers believe?
• Old Believers-Priests
• Old Believers without priests
• Old Believers and Pagans

Old and new faith

One of the most tragic events in the history of Russia in the 17th century was the schism of the Russian Church. Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich Romanov and his closest spiritual associate, Patriarch Nikon (Minin), decided to carry out a global church reform. Having begun with seemingly insignificant changes - a change in the folding of fingers during the sign of the cross from two to three fingers and the abolition of prostrations, the reform soon affected all aspects of the Divine Service and the Rule. Continuing and developing to one degree or another until the reign of Emperor Peter I, this reform changed many canonical rules, spiritual institutions, customs of church administration, written and unwritten traditions. Almost all aspects of the religious, and then cultural and everyday life of the Russian people underwent changes.

Painting by V. G. Perov “Nikita Pustosvyat. Dispute about faith"

However, with the beginning of the reforms, it became clear that a significant number of Russian Christians saw in them an attempt to betray the doctrine itself, to destroy the religious and cultural structure that had developed for centuries in Rus' after its Baptism. Many priests, monks and laity spoke out against the plans of the tsar and the patriarch. They wrote petitions, letters and appeals, denouncing innovations and defending the faith that had been preserved for hundreds of years. In their writings, apologists pointed out that the reforms not only forcibly reshape traditions and legends, under pain of execution and persecution, but also affected the most important thing - they destroyed and changed the Christian faith itself. Almost all defenders of the ancient church tradition wrote that Nikon’s reform was apostate and changed the faith itself. Thus, the holy martyr Archpriest Avvakum pointed out:

They lost their way and retreated from the true faith with Nikon, an apostate, a malicious, pernicious heretic. They want to establish faith with fire, the whip, and the gallows!

He also called not to be afraid of torturers and to suffer for the “old Christian Faith.” Expressed in the same spirit famous writer of that time, the defender of Orthodoxy Spiridon Potemkin:

Striving for the true faith will be damaged by heretical pretexts (additions), so that faithful Christians will not understand, but may be seduced into deception.

Potemkin condemned the Divine services and rituals performed according to the new books and new orders, which he called “evil faith”:

Heretics are those who baptize into their evil faith; they baptize blaspheming God into the One Holy Trinity.

About the need for protection paternal legend and the old Russian faith was written by the confessor and martyr Deacon Theodore, citing numerous examples from the history of the Church:

The heretic starved the pious people who suffered from him for the old faith in exile... And if God vindicates the old faith as a single priest before the whole kingdom, all the authorities will be disgraced and reproached by the whole world.

The monastic confessors of the Solovetsky Monastery, who refused to accept the reform of Patriarch Nikon, wrote to Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich in their fourth petition:

Commanded, sir, that we should be in our same Old Faith, in which your father the sovereign and all the noble kings and great princes and our fathers died, and the venerable fathers Zosima and Savatius, and Herman, and Metropolitan Philip and all the holy fathers pleased God.

So gradually it began to be said that before the reforms of Patriarch Nikon and Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich, before the church schism, there was one faith, and after the schism there was another faith. The pre-schism confession began to be called the old faith, and the post-schism reformed confession - the new faith.

This opinion was not denied by the supporters of Patriarch Nikon’s reforms themselves. Thus, Patriarch Joachim, at a famous debate in the Faceted Chamber, said:

First a new faith was established; with the advice and blessing of the most holy ecumenical patriarchs.

While still an archimandrite, he stated:

I don’t know either the old faith or the new faith, but I do whatever the leaders tell me to do.

So gradually the concept of “old faith” appeared, and people professing it began to be called “Old Believers”, “Old Believers”. Thus, Old Believers began to be called people who refused to accept the church reforms of Patriarch Nikon and adhered to church institutions ancient Rus', that is, the old faith. Those who accepted the reform began to be called “new believers” or “new lovers.” However, the term “New Believers” did not take root for long, and the term “Old Believers” still exists today.

Old Believers or Old Believers?

For a long time, in government and church documents, Orthodox Christians who preserved ancient liturgical rites, early printed books and customs were called “schismatics.” They were accused of being faithful to church tradition, which allegedly led to a church schism. For many years, schismatics were subjected to repression, persecution, and infringement of civil rights.

However, during the reign of Catherine the Great, attitudes towards the Old Believers began to change. The Empress believed that the Old Believers could be very useful for settling the uninhabited areas of the expanding Russian Empire.

At the suggestion of Prince Potemkin, Catherine signed a number of documents granting them rights and benefits to live in special areas of the country. In these documents, the Old Believers were named not as “schismatics,” but as “Old Believers,” which, if not a sign of goodwill, undoubtedly indicated a weakening of the state’s negative attitude towards the Old Believers. The Old Orthodox Christians, the Old Believers, however, did not suddenly agree to the use of this name. In apologetic literature and the resolutions of some Councils it was indicated that the term “Old Believers” was not entirely acceptable.

It was written that the name “Old Believers” implies that the reasons for the church division of the 17th century lay in the same church rituals, while the faith itself remained completely intact. Thus, the Irgiz Old Believer Council of 1805 called co-religionists “Old Believers,” that is, Christians who use old rituals and old printed books, but obey the Synodal Church. The resolution of the Irgiz Cathedral read:

Others retreated from us to the renegades, called Old Believers, who, like us, keep old printed books and conduct services from them, but have no shame in communicating with everyone in everything, both in prayer and in eating and drinking.

In the historical and apologetic writings of the Old Orthodox Christians of the 18th - first half of the 19th centuries, the terms “Old Believers” and “Old Believers” continued to be used. They are used, for example, in the “History of the Vygovskaya Hermitage” by Ivan Filippov, the apologetic work “Deacon’s Answers” ​​and others. This term was also used by numerous New Believer authors, such as N.I. Kostomarov, S. Knyazkov. P. Znamensky, for example, in the 1870 edition of the “Guide to Russian History” says:

Peter became much stricter towards the Old Believers.

At the same time, over the years, some Old Believers began to use the term “Old Believers.” Moreover, as the famous Old Believer writer Pavel the Curious (1772–1848) points out in his historical dictionary, the name Old Believers is more characteristic of non-priest consents, and “Old Believers” - to persons belonging to consents that accept the fleeing priesthood.

And indeed, the agreements that accepted the priesthood (Belokrinitsky and Beglopopovsky), by the beginning of the 20th century, instead of the term “Old Believers”, “Old Believers” increasingly began to use “Old Believers”. Soon the name Old Believers was enshrined at the legislative level by the famous decree of Emperor Nicholas II “On strengthening the principles of religious tolerance.” The seventh paragraph of this document reads:

To assign the name Old Believers, instead of the currently used name of schismatics, to all followers of rumors and agreements who accept the basic dogmas of the Orthodox Church, but do not recognize some of the rituals accepted by it and conduct their worship according to old printed books.

However, even after this, many Old Believers continued to be called Old Believers. The non-priest consents especially carefully preserved this name. D. Mikhailov, author of the magazine “Native Antiquity”, published by the Old Believer circle of adherents of Russian antiquity in Riga (1927), wrote:

Archpriest Avvakum speaks about the “old Christian faith,” and not about “rites.” That is why nowhere in all the historical decrees and messages of the first zealots of ancient Orthodoxy is the name “Old Believer” found anywhere.

What do Old Believers believe?

The Old Believers, as the heirs of pre-schism, pre-reform Rus', try to preserve all the dogmas, canonical provisions, ranks and followers of the Old Russian Church.

First of all, of course, this concerns the main church dogmas: the confession of St. Trinity, the incarnation of God the Word, two hypostases of Jesus Christ, his atoning Sacrifice on the Cross and Resurrection. The main difference between the confession of the Old Believers and other Christian confessions is the use of forms of worship and church piety characteristic of the ancient Church.

Among them are the two-fingered sign of the cross, immersion baptism, unison singing, canonical iconography, and special prayer clothing. For Divine Services, the Old Believers use old printed liturgical books published before 1652 (mainly published under the last pious Patriarch Joseph. The Old Believers, however, do not represent a single community or church - for hundreds of years they were divided into two main directions: priests and non-priests.

Old Believers-Priests

The Old Believers-Priests, in addition to other church institutions, recognize the three-tier Old Believer hierarchy (priesthood) and all the church sacraments of the ancient Church, among which the most famous are: Baptism, Confirmation, Eucharist, Priesthood, Marriage, Confession (Repentance), Blessing of Anointing. In addition to these seven sacraments in the Old Belief, there are other, somewhat less known sacraments and sacred rites, namely: tonsure as a monk (equivalent to the sacrament of Marriage), the Great and Small Blessing of Water, the Blessing of Oil on Polyeleos, and the priestly blessing.

Old Believers without priests

Old Believers without priests believe that after the church schism caused by Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich, the pious church hierarchy(bishops, priests, deacons) disappeared. And therefore part church sacraments in the form in which they existed before the split of the Church was abolished. Today, all Old Believers without priests definitely recognize only two sacraments: Baptism and Confession (repentance). Some non-priests (Old Orthodox Pomeranian Church) also recognize the sacrament of Marriage. The Old Believers of the Chapel Concord also allow the Eucharist (Communion) with the help of St. gifts consecrated in ancient times and preserved to this day. The chapels also recognize the Great Blessing of water, which on the day of Epiphany is received by pouring into new water water, consecrated in the old days, when, in their opinion, there were still pious priests.

Old Believers or Old Believers?

From time to time, a discussion arises among Old Believers of all agreements: “Can they be called Old Believers?” Some argue that it is necessary to call ourselves exclusively Christians because no old faith and old rituals exist, as well as a new faith and new rituals. According to such people, there is only one true, one right faith and only true Orthodox rituals, and everything else is heretical, non-Orthodox, crooked Orthodox confession and wisdom.

Others, as mentioned above, consider it absolutely obligatory to be called Old Believers, professing the old faith, because they believe that the difference between the Old Orthodox Christians and the followers of Patriarch Nikon is not only in rituals, but also in the faith itself.

Still others believe that the word Old Believers should be replaced with the term “Old Believers.” In their opinion, there is no difference in faith between the Old Believers and the followers of Patriarch Nikon (Nikonians). The only difference is in the rituals, which among the Old Believers are correct, while among the Nikonians they are damaged or completely incorrect.

There is a fourth opinion regarding the concept of Old Believers and the old faith. It is shared mainly by the children of the Synodal Church. In their opinion, between the Old Believers (Old Believers) and the New Believers (New Believers) there is not only a difference in faith, but also in rituals. They call both old and new rituals equally honorable and equally salutary. The use of one or another is only a matter of taste and historical and cultural tradition. This is stated in the decree Local Council Moscow Patriarchate from 1971.

Old Believers and Pagans

At the end of the 20th century, religious and quasi-religious cultural associations began to appear in Russia, professing religious views that have nothing to do with Christianity and, in general, with Abrahamic and biblical religions. Supporters of some such associations and sects proclaim the revival of pre-Christian religious traditions, pagan Rus'. In order to stand out, to separate their views from the Christianity received in Rus' during the time of Prince Vladimir, some neo-pagans began to call themselves “Old Believers.”

Christians and pagans

And although the use of this term in this context is incorrect and erroneous, the view began to spread in society that the Old Believers are really pagans who are reviving the old faith in the ancients Slavic gods- Perun, Svarog, Dazhbog, Veles and others. It is no coincidence that, for example, the religious association “Old Russian Inglistic Church of Orthodox Old Believers-Inglings” appeared. Its head, Pater Diy (A. Yu. Khinevich), called “Patriarch of Old Russian Orthodox Church Old Believers,” even stated:

Old Believers are supporters of the old Christian rite, and Old Believers are the old pre-Christian faith.

There are other neo-pagan communities and Rodnoverie cults that may be mistakenly perceived by society as Old Believer and Orthodox. Among them are the “Veles Circle”, “Union of Slavic Communities of the Slavic Native Faith”, “Russian Orthodox Circle” and others. Most of these associations arose on the basis of pseudo-historical reconstruction and falsification historical sources. In fact, apart from folklore folk beliefs, no reliable information nothing has been preserved about the pagans of pre-Christian Rus'.

At some point, in the early 2000s, the term “Old Believers” became quite widely accepted as a synonym for pagans. However, thanks to extensive explanatory work, as well as a number of serious lawsuits against the “Old Believers-Ynglings” and other extremist neo-pagan groups, the popularity of this linguistic phenomenon has now begun to decline. In recent years, the overwhelming majority of neo-pagans still prefer to be called “Rodnovers.”

G. S. Chistyakov