Onufrie Vinteler
| Key
words: Lipovean Russians, minority, differences, religion, political context, history, Slavs, Russian Church |
Prof.,
Ph.D. Faculty of Letters Babes-Bolyai University, Cluj, Romania |
The Community of Lipovean Russians from Romania
| previous |
Abstract: The author focuses on the topic of "Lipovean-Russian" from Romania, a denomination that he proposes as an alternative to the mainstream one, "Russian-Lipovean". The author of the paper documents on the history of this ethnic minority, which is also a religious one. In his analysis, the role of the Church is carefully examined, as it shaped the political context in which the Lipovean-Russians lived and their respective cultural life. The author also analyses the differences among different religious branches of this community. The official literature employs the denomination Russian-Lipoveans. In my opinion, this is not a happy choice, as there are few non-Lipovean Russians in Romania. Moreover, the Lipoveans living in Romania are dispersed over a rather vast area and do not form compact demography. I propose as more opportune the Lipovean-Russians denomination because there are many Lipovean Romanians. The residents of the town of Lipova are called Lipoveans, and so are those living in the district of town Alba-Iulia. There are several JSRI • No.3 /Winter 2002 p. 158 villages in the regions of Moldova and Oltenia by the name of Lipova or Lipoveni. Hence, I feel the name Lipovean-Russians to be more opportune. Over the last decades, the eponym Lipovean was a frequent occurrence in Romanian linguistics. An exhaustive history of the term Lipovean can be found in the Ph.D. thesis of Alla Vinteler1, who considers that the origin of this term can be traced back to the patronymic of Filipp - the name of a monk. More recent authors2 also endorse the idea. Over the centuries, the Lipoveans and their ancestors went by the name of staroobreadtsi, and their religious cult was called staroobreadcestvo, in French: Vieille Foi, in English: the Old Faith, in Romanian: believers in the old rite. All that time, the term "believers in the old rite" was associated varied epithets such as rascolnik, schismatic, sectants. The Orthodox (Pravoslavnic) population in Ardeal was labeled schismatic3 by the Catholics and the Calvinists. In the same vein, several recordings of the believers in the old rite can be found in church and laic Russian official correspondence and documents. Documents recording them were published in Russian (the majority), in German4, in Romanian5, in English6, in French7, and other. To better comprehend the situation of the believers in the old rite we must review briefly the history of the Russian religion. First, let us note that the Eastern Slavs hadn't experienced slavery and the existence of a slave state in the 9th century when the Byzantine Empire, the most important state in Eastern Europe, was a feudal state, would surely be anachronistic. It is considered that Russia was officially Christianized in the year 988, by Vladimir, prince of Kiev. Before and even after, the Eastern Slavs, organized in tribes, worshiped deities such as: Perun, Svarog, Dajbag, Veles, Hors, Makas and others. The number and hierarchy of their deities bear no comparison to those of the Greeks, Romans, or Indians. The pagan religion of the Eastern Slavs was conveyed in an oral poetry heavily influencing the subsequent high literature. The conversion to Christianity of the Slavs in general, and of the Eastern Slavs in particular, had early beginnings. There is evidence that the early conversions of the Eastern Slavs took place in the south of present day Russia and the Ukraine, at the turn of the 4th century. Considering that the Byzantine Empire with its vast territory and influence was in the proximity, this thesis is quite valid. In fact, in that exact period Christianity was spreading to other neighboring populations. However, the definite official date for the diffusion of Christianity to the Eastern Slavs is the year 867 when Kievean Russia congregated for the evangelic sermon of Princes Askold and Dir, themselves baptized by Patriarch Fotii following their unsuccessful attack on the Byzantine Empire. Unfortunately, in 882 Askold and Dir were assassinated by Oleg, the infidel. Following their death, Christianity lost some of its holding and the process of diffusion slowed down in Kiev. Even so, the eastern Slav territory was registered as the 6oth Eparchy of the Constantinople Patriarchy8. Under the reign of Igor a church under the patron saint Elijah is consecrated in the year 946. Next, princess Olga, JSRI • No.3 /Winter 2002 p. 159
Vladimir's grandmother, is baptized in Constantinople, together with her
kin and suite, marking yet another important step in the history of the
Russian Church. Hence, when Vladimir, the nephew of Olga, was baptized
at Constantinople, the Russian church had already a long tradition. The
merit of Vladimir was that on his return from Constantinople he baptized
all of his 12 sons, destroyed the idols and ordered that the population
be baptized in the Nippers in the year 988. In conclusion, the process
of Christening had begun long prior to 988 to be continued after.
The church played an important role in
the foundation and the development of the Russian culture, in the spreading
of writings, books, literature and artistic values. Writing was introduced
to the Eastern Slavs before the spreading of Christianity.
Between the 9th and 10th
centuries the Bogomilus movement, named after the doctrine of priest Bogomilus9,
emerged in Bulgaria. This ideology spread quickly to Serbia, Bosnia, Dalmatia,
the Byzantine Empire, and later to Northern Italy, Southern France, and
Germany. Over the following centuries the Bogomiles influenced the Eastern
Slavs too.
In early 13th century the Mongol State
was flourishing. At the same time, Eastern Europe, the Middle Orient and
even China were undergoing a period of turmoil and discord. Genghis-Khan
took advantage of the situation in the intent of conquering the world.
After conquering the peoples of Siberia, Northern China and Central Asia
he headed for Eastern Europe, and in 1223 he defeated the Russians at
Kala. The year 1236 marked the beginning of the process of subordination
and occupation of the Russian territories. 1380 was the year of the renowned
battle at Kulikovo with heavy losses on both sides. The Mongol occupation
continued for two and a half centuries, throughout which Russia was cut
off from Europe, with many cities in the occupied territory destroyed
and burned down along with their cultural treasures, the churches in particular.
The economy, commerce, culture, all suffered under the occupation. The
cities in the North were spared and consequently prospered moderately.
During the latter half of the occupation period, the subject population
enjoyed moderate freedom. The Churches, particularly the convents, granted
freedom by the Khans, developed and accumulated wealth even while continuing
to Christen the infidel peasants. It was a time when the church and state
official ties strengthened. The metropolitan bishop Cyril tried to unify
the doctrines in the religious publications and to impose a uniform standard.
Throughout these two centuries, religion
and church in such orthodox countries as Greece, Serbia, Bulgaria, the
Romanian Principalities, underwent some changes. These countries were
under the religious influence and patronage of the Byzantine Empire. After
Cyril's death, the Russian metropolitan church was divided into two: the
Muscovite church and the Lithuanian church. After the conquest of the
town of Kazan, an orthodox department was set up, a church was consecrated
and a diocese was established. The
JSRI • No.3 /Winter 2002 p. 160
spreading of the orthodoxy in Astrakhan and in Siberia followed a similar
pattern.
The intensification of Catholic propaganda
in Southwest Russia was an urge for the orthodox to build schools and
typographies to fight the papists. The brotherhoods also ran schools that
prepared the orthodox to fight the Unitarians. Just as in Ardeal, the
leaders of the Russian Church were persecuted by the Unitarians. In the
North, confessional education was hindered by specific factors.
In order to speed up the spreading of
orthodox influence, in 1625 Patriarch Filaret founded in Russia four metropolitan
churches, six archbishoprics and eight bishoprics. Boris Godunov intended
to found a university, but his initiative was strongly opposed by the
church, so he was content with founding just a few schools. I have mentioned
all these in support of the idea that the reforms of Nikon were the continuation
and culmination of orthodoxy in Russia.
The issue, then, is not whether there
was a reform of the church, but rather how the reform was implemented.
Religious reform in Russia was preceded by civil wars, by feudal anarchy,
other reforms and the passage of various laws, all taking place in other
European countries. Thus, "in the context created in the second half
of the 14th century by the centralization propensities, there emerged
even larger and more powerful states, which in turn accelerated the process
of territorial unification within, as was the case in Poland, the Great
Principality of Lithuania, the Russian Principalities of the north-east,
or the Serbian kingdom. This In Russia the centralization of power
intensified in the 15th century and was continued under Tsar
Ivan the Terrible (1533-1584), Boris Godunov (1598-1606), Vasili Suiski
(1606- 1610). The founder of the Romanov dynasty, Mikhail Feodorovici
(1613- 1645) prohibited the peasant's movement during the field seasons.
His son, Alexey Mikhailovich (1645-1676) ultimately tied the peasants
to the land. The above laws in conjunction with the religious laws caused
turmoil among the Russians.
We have already mentioned that the Metropolitan
Cyril was contemplating a reconsideration of the translation of the Scriptures.
The setting of unified rules for all Russian orthodox provinces came,
too, under scrutiny during the rule of Ivan the Terrible. In this sense,
see "The Council of the 100 Articles" summoned in 1551. From
the proposal of Cyril to the Synod of 1654 at Moscow, there was a lapse
of two and half centuries, during which the differences between books
and rituals came under analysis and debate.
The Nikon reform raises many questions.
We have no wish to enumerate or pause at every one of them. Some, however,
are worth mentioning. Why was it necessary
JSRI • No.3 /Winter 2002 p. 161
that the reform be implemented precisely then? After the downfall of the
Byzantine Empire and the fall of Constantinople under Turkish dominion,
Russia remained the only independent orthodox country. Russia concentrated
the elite orthodox intelligentsia from Constantinople, Greece, Serbia,
Bulgaria and the Romanian Principalities. To Moscow they brought along
many religious books but also customs novel to the land. Let us quote
in this line an expert in the history of religions: "When the star
of New Rome set, the star of old imperial Byzantium, in the north rose
yet another Orthodox Empire claiming for itself the heritage of the fortress
lost by the Christians and the splendor of the crown of the orthodox Emperor,
the representative and defender of all righteous Christian believers.
The Tsar was led to believe this not only by his subjects and the Russian
clergy, but mainly by the Greeks and the Serbians too, who came flocking
to Moscow with every opportunity to extol him… "11
Bishop Filotei of Pskov, remarking on
the progress and growing power of Russia, and on the beauty and grandeur
of Kremlin, wrote in a letter of 1512 to prince Vasilie III (1533): "Moscow
is the heir of the great capitals of world, of ancient Rome and of the
second Rome after Constantinople, the former owing its fall to papal heresy,
the latter to the union at Florence. Moscow is the third Rome, the believer
in good faith, and there will never be a fourth Rome."12
Due to its power and extension, the Russian Orthodox Church became the
patron of all orthodox believers around the world. Everyone looked to
Russia for help, both spiritual and material, from the Russian patriarchy.
During the 250-year period some differences
between the Russian and the Balkan churches emerged, which then called
for standardization. Even though formally the Russian Church was subordinated
to the Constantinople Patriarchy, it couldn't operate changes in the rite
as readily as the Balkan countries could. Russia's intention was to increase
its influence over Southeastern Europe, but it could not coerce the Balkan
countries to resume the old rite, and so ended up by accepting the doctrines
of the orthodox believers in the Balkans. This explains why Tsar Alexey
Mikhailovici involved himself personally in the implementation of the
religious reform in Russia. Political and ideological interests played
a leading role in the religious reform, while religious interests came
only second. Nikon was merely an upstart implementer, uneducated and lacking
the necessary training for the position of metropolitan bishop and patriarch.
The sudden death of his competitor, Stefan Vonifatiev, shortly after abandoning
the race, can only set one thinking. Other advocates of the Nikonian reforms
were patriarchs Macarie of Antioch and Paisie of Alexandria, who participated
in the Synod of 1667.
If I'm not mistaken, I think that rather
than Tsar Alexei adhering and backing the ideas of Nikon's reform, it
was really a matter of Nikon tacitly accepting and implementing them.
The combined action by the patriarch and the tsar to change the rite and
church books aimed at imposing the same standard not only in
JSRI • No.3 /Winter 2002 p. 162
Russia and the Balkan countries, but also in the Ukraine and Belorussia.
The goal was, on the one hand, to elaborate a uniform orthodox rite across
the entire territory of Great Russia, and on the other, to create a rite
for all orthodoxy. The situation of the holy books had been rather awkward
since the introduction of Christianity. Numerous churches had been built
but hardly enough books printed to propagate and to educate the people
in the rite. The early translations were poor and superficial. Greek translators
were not familiar with the Slavonic language, and the Russians didn't
have a good command of Greek, creating a situation that engendered differences
from the start. Even though the differences pertained to form only, they
ignited hot debates and opposition. Also, as I have mentioned, the development
of Christianity generated further differences leading to schism and turmoil.
Let us see what differences were triggered by such debate:
Believers in the old rite
`Alleluia' is chanted twice, followed
by `Glory to You, God'.
The sign of the Cross is made with two
fingers.
The eight-corner cross is accepted.
Liturgy is served with seven communion
breads.
Processions around the church follow the
direction of the sun.
Priests are chosen from among parishioners
and do not take long training to serve in churches. Priests depend on
the congregation for their livelihood.
Priests shave their beards and wear their
hair short.
Entrance into the church regulates conduct
and dress.
Smoking and drinking are prohibited.
Believers in the new rite
`Alleluia' is chanted three times, in
translations there is also a fourth.
The sign of the Cross is made with three
fingers.
The six-corner cross is accepted.
Liturgy is served with five communion
breads.
Processions around church are counter
sun movement.
To solve the differences above, a synod
was summoned at Moscow in 1654 where the reform ideas proposed by Nikon
were met with hostility. Nikon, however, thirsting for power suggested
the use of force against his opponents. They counted among them bishops,
priests, monks, as well as nobility. Let's just mention countess Morozova
and her sister Urusova. The opponents sided with tradition. Nikon did
not even wait for the synod to end to start the attack upon his opponents.
The atrocities committed against the believers in the old rite are unbelievable.
The adepts were put in chains, burned at the stake, had their tongues,
hands, nose, and ears cut off. Whole families and entire villages were
sent on permanent exile to Siberia. The atrocities of the official church
and of the authorities knew no bounds. After the meeting of 1667, the
fight against the opponents was taken over by the state authorities. Why?
Simultaneously to the forceful introduction of reforms by Nikon, the Russian
Orthodox Church experienced a breach that hasn't healed to this
JSRI • No.3 /Winter 2002 p. 163
day. This led to the emergence of two orthodox churches: the Nikonian
Church, to become the official church of Russia, and the Orthodox Church
in the old rite or the schism church. The latter serviced by the old books
and traditional rite, and its believers were called schismatic and Rascolnic.
Amos Porfiriu13 offered a rather
unreasonable analysis of the term Rascolnic, based on some Romanian and
bilingual dictionaries. Every dictionary or encyclopedia that discusses
realities of other countries derives its sources from documents in the
respective languages. I think that it would have been more reasonable
for Mr. A. Porfiriu to read A.N.Vostokov (1781-1864) Slovary cerkovno
-slavjanskogo jazyka, Vol.1-2, Saint Petersburg, 1858-1861 or Natolnij
enciklopediceskij slovari, Moscova, 1895, Vol. 8, PP. 582-592. It
doesn't mean that I totally disagree with the ideas espoused by A. Porfiriu.
After all, who initiated the study of the Orthodox Church in Russia? The
representatives of the traditional church? Certainly not!
We consider that the believers in the
old rite were unreasonably labeled schismatic. Schism means "the
formal separation of a group of believers from the religious community
to which they appertain", or "scission" for schism in French.
Query: who was separated from whom, more exactly? Is it possible for an
entire population to separate from a leading group, or is the reverse
true? Similar explanations can be provided for such terms as sect, sectarian,
and others. Sectarian, which means "intolerant with the beliefs of
others, exclusive", can very well be applied to the Nikonians. The
schism (rascol) represented in the existence of the Russian people
a paramount event of great magnitude. The movement, involving the private
family life of a vast population, bred many purely religious ideas and
tendencies, which intertwined with vital social problems, caused some
anxiety within the Russian society at the time. New regulations in human
relations were introduced, changes in attitudes and beliefs, but mostly
in religious belief.
In those hard times, believers in the
old rite were forced to choose between maltreatment and persecution and
abandoning their homes for peripheral and isolated locations exempt from
the direct surveillance of the authorities and the official church. The
Rascolnics were not permitted to live in towns and marriages were validated
only if performed by the official church. In the places they moved, the
believers in the old rite built new villages, towns, churches, monasteries,
cleared and cultivated the land. But persecution units followed them all
the way here. Villages and towns fell once again victims to the tsarist
authorities. Due to continued persecution, the Rascolnics fled to the
South then under Turkish dominion, to the Baltic countries, to Poland,
to Bucovina then occupied by the Austrians, and to Dobrogea. When the
Russian army attacked the Ottoman Empire the villages of the believers
in the old rite were destroyed. The old rite Russian population was banned
access to religious and cultural centers, to official institutions. Consequently,
the believers in the old rite duly developed several currents called sects.
In Romania they came to be known as the
JSRI • No.3 /Winter 2002 p. 164
Lipoveni/ Filipoveti. The founder of the sect was Fotii, an army officer
who had defected from Novgorod to the monastery of Vagodsk, where he lived
for a time under the name of monk Filipp. At the demise of Daniil Vikulov,
the abbot, Filipp intended to take his place, but Semen Denisov was preferred
over him. Not taking defeat easily, Fillipp started writing several letters
denouncing the poor administration of the monastery under Semen. To solve
the problem a council was summoned, which ruled in favor of Semen Denisov.
Filipp together with 50 others then left the monastery and built another
not far from Vigovsk.
Fillip introduced the 8 corner cross,
ruled that believers must pray only to their own private icons. They must
not pray for the tsar. Husband and wife if married before must be divorced
and chastised. They should consider one another brothers and sisters.
In 1742 a commission led by Samarin visiting
all the northern monasteries arrived at the one administered by Filipp.
The Filippovens shut themselves in and wouldn't meet the members of the
commission. The commission ordered the gates broken down, but the Filippovens
set the monastery on fire with them inside. Some must have survived because
the name of sect has been preserved. The first collective suicide was
recorded at Pomorie, in Palostrove, in 1687, when 2,700 people set themselves
on fire.
Not having a guiding center, a hierarchical
authority to organize the activity of the believers in the old rite, many
currents - called sects by the official church - emerged. In Romania another
sect was that of the Bespopovtii (without a priest) which had no ordained
priest. The official church wouldn't acknowledge the priests of the sect,
consequently no baptism, marriage, or burial could be performed. The doctrine
of the Bespopovtii forbade marriage, demanded sexual abstinence, but the
precepts were not obeyed and the convents often had to close an eye to
philandering. Confronted with an increase in clandestine affairs in mid
18th century Ivan Alexeev proposed that the stricter precepts
should be observed only by those capable of it, indicating that it was
best for the rest to marry.
Another sect, whose members live in the
village 2 May, Romania, was that of the Skopits (skopit means to
physically remove the testicles, to castrate). This sect derived from
still another called Plastovscina, whose members sought Salvation through
torture unto death. For the same reason they practiced castration persuaded
of its honorable and glorious power to heal. Unable to procreate, they
disappeared.
The Church and tsarist administration
launched fierce attacks upon the believers in the old rite. They even
edited special magazines against them such as "Russkij palomnik",
"Bratskoe slovo", "Missionerskoe obozrenie", and more.
The problem they were confronted with was the extraordinary speed and
the vast area of diffusion of the rascol and Rascolnics in Russia.
In my opinion, however, the problem is misinterpreted. It is a known fact
that the service in all the Russian churches was performed in the old
rite, so it wasn't really a matter of spreading - they had been
there all this time. Instead, it was rather the official church that
JSRI • No.3 /Winter 2002 p. 165
needed to propagate its new regulations and have them accepted. In other
words, rather than the believers in the old rite struggling against the
official church, we have the reverse case. They were merely trying to
defend a tradition.
All of the tsarist administrative and
official church propaganda directed against the believers in the old rite
denote deep hate combined with fear. They propagated their image under
the slogan: they are the ultimate evil. However, there were indeed `good'
contributions by the believers in the old rite. They settled isolated
territories, cleared and cultivated the land, engaged in different trades,
built mills, fished and traded. Soon, they were prospering. The convents
were ranked as monasteries but were organized on laic principles. There
were schools for children of both sexes, with their own qualified teachers,
and endowed libraries. They copied books, old rite documents, wrote poetry,
painted allegorical pictures. In the localities with old rite residents
everyone could read (in sharp contrast, by the 20th century
the majority of the Russian population was still illiterate).
A statistics of the year 1863 compiled
by Fon Bucheni registers 8,220,000 believers in the old rite representing
1/6 of the entire Russian population. Romania, due to persecutions, was
the choice of the old rite believers called Lipoveni. They first settled
in Dobrogea, Bucovina, and Moldova. They have a special place in their
houses reserved for the cross, icons, and candles where every member of
the family prays. Every family has a private bath where they wash every
Saturday for one is not allowed to enter the church not groomed. Notes: 1. Alla Vinteler, Lexicul folclorului lipovenesc, Cluj, 1974, p.12-15 2. Idem, p.16-21; Sevastian Fenoghev, Sarichioi (pagini de istorie), Bucuresti, 1998, p.150-156; Peter Osip, Rusii de rit vechi (lipveni) in Tarile Romane, in Cultura rusilor lipoveni (ortodoxi de rit vechi din Romania) in context national si international, Bucuresti, 1998, p.152-153. 3. Cf. Siviu Dragomir, Relatiile bisericii romanesti cu Rusia in veacul XVII, Bucuresti, 1912; Idem, Istoria dezxrobirii religioase a romanilor din Ardeal: secolul XVIII, vol.I, Sibiu, 1920, vol.II, 1930. 4. Johann Polek, Die Lippowaner in der Bukowina, Czernowitz, 1896, Karl Konrad Crass, Die russichen Sekten, Dorpab-Leipzig, 1907, 1914. 5. St. Melchisedec, Lipovenismula, dica schismaticii si ereticii rusi, Bcuresti, 1871; I. Nistor, Cercetari asupra cultului lipovenesc din Romania, cf. si vol. F. Chirila, A. Ivanov, Th.Olteanu, Probleme de dialectologie. Graiurile lipvenesti din Romania, Bucuresti, 1993 6. Cf. Victor Vascenco, Omisiune istorica regretabila, in Cultura rusilor lipoveni, p.96 7. Idem 8. Nastol'yj enciklopediceskij slovar', Moscova, 1895, tom.VIII - yj., p.5082 9. V.K.Zajcev, Bogomil'skoe dvizenie i obscestvenaja zizn severnoj Italii epohi Ducento, Minsk, 1967 10. Istoria Romanilor, Bucuresti, 2002, p.475 11. Silviu Dragomir, Relatiile bisericii romanesti, p.2 12. Apud, Milan Sesan, Biserica ortodoxa in veacurile XV-XVII, in Mitropolia Ardealuluui, 1963, nr. 11-12, p.860 13. Amos Porfiriu, Cine sunt "rascolnicii"?, Œn "Kitej-grad", 1998, nr.2, p.10. JSRI • No.3 /Winter 2002 p. 166 JSRI • No. 3/Winter 2002 |
| previous |