That's a bit of misconception and rampant simplification concerning what happened with the Old Believers. First of all, the Old Believer's were dynamite waiting to happen: there was a strong apocalyptic current in Russia always looking for the sign of the end times and signs of the Antichrist for any little thing, and when the Patriarch changed a bunch of rites, that was more than enough of a reason for them: they said the Church was now taken over by Satan, and that now all Sacraments were invalid: they said now the only way to gain absolution of sins was a baptism by fire; many burned their homes with their whole families inside in order to achieve this. They were also vocal preachers and said the Orthodox Church was the Devil and draw as many people from it as possible; there were numerous more quiet heresies throughout the thousand years of the Church in Russia, from Judaizers to basically Gnostics, but none were seriously persecuted because they weren't nearly as agitated. Old Belivers today are mostly to themselves, though, and they aren't so crazy; tolerance was given to them at that point, which was before the Russian Revolution; persecution resumed under the Bolsheviks though.
Next, on the Patriarch's side, you had a very, very politically ambitious: he had plans to take control of the See of Constantinople, through Russian conquest and having it incorporated into the Russian Church. He knew that in order to facilitate this, so the Greeks wouldn't feel "occupied" by the Russian Church (they would be conquering from the Turks), he'd need to ensure there would be no change at all in services and rites. So he switched the Russian rites over to what was the Greek rites; the idea that he wanted to "restore" the rite was just a pretense he used. Anyway, this Patriarch eventually got too big for his britches, and was defrocked, and spent the rest of his life confined to a monastery.
So it wasn't really about rituals, it just formed along those lines.
Honestly I always found it weird how many breakaway sects there were in Orthodoxy but most of them were either extremely minor or got suppressed quickly. They never saw something like the Catholics did with the explosion of Protestantism, only shows you what incompetent fucktards the Catholics are.
Lucas Anderson
>So it wasn't really about rituals, it just formed along those lines. So when it's about other faiths it's an argument about petty rituals, but when it's about your faith it's about serious fundamental issues that merely look like they're about petty issues from an outsider's perspective?
Lucas King
This wasn't about theologians arguing with each other, it was about a mostly illiterate populist movement who thought the new way of doing things was Satanic (which is a bit absurd, since that would mean the Greeks were Satanic, who were One Church with the Russians, but isolated and illiterate people are not necessarily going to know that). How you cross yourself is not dogma and never has been.
Hudson Sanchez
There was actually almost never suppression of breakaways by the Orthodox; there was of people within the Church spreading their beliefs, but if they just broke off, there wasn't really any effort as suppressing them. They nearly always just lost steam and disappeared on their own.
Dominic Morgan
>there was never suppression
Nice revisionism faggot, when did you drop your trip?
Oliver Smith
Given that in the end they had actually preserved Tradition more faithfully than the Greeks, and the Orthodox church prides itself on its Traditions preserving the rites of the original Christians exactly, I don't see why they shouldn't see the changes as satanic.
Besides, that's not the point. The point is that this quibble is being rationalized away as something much different than the way the quibbles of other faiths are trivialized.
Ian Roberts
There wasn't. Name a single breakaway sect in Russia's history, aside from the Old Believers, who experienced significant persecution.
Wyatt Phillips
>name any persecuted sects aside from a persecuted sect
huh wew
Leo Williams
I don't think the original Christians crossed themselves. The earliest sign of the cross was done over the forehead, it was retracing your chrismation anointment. The later one probably came out of the blessing sign, which made a hand gesture of Greek letters standing for Jesus Christ (the Old Believer cross isn't this, but closer to it). The Greek one, adopted by Patriarch, was established as a way to express the Trinity, three pinched fingers. None of this has to do with some method of crossing yourself taught by Christ, they are just various expressions what Christ taught.
Logan Robinson
So you agree there was, as I said, almost never suppression?
Asher Clark
The Doukhobors say hi.
Christian Cooper
Daily Reminder that the Orthodoxy is as lost as the Catholics.
Jack Russell
The Stubbotniks.
Grayson Lopez
Why? because there is no dogmatic way to make the sign of the cross? That would be as absurd as a dogmatic language for worship.
Dogma is, and can only be, what was directly and personally taught by Christ to the Apostles. That's why we don't even have a dogmatic Biblical canon: Christ never prescribed a canon, so no Biblical canon can be dogma.
Luke Baker
They were persecuted solely by the state because they refused to serve in the military. The Orthodox Church had many writings denouncing them, but never persecuted them
They were only persecuted actively by the government once they started being officially classified as Jews, which the government loved to kick around. The Church had no hand in either their persecution, or the persecution of Jews, and in fact many clergy actively opposed it.
> The government noticed the faction in 1817 when a group of peasants in the Voronezh region addressed a petition to the Tsar that naively complained of “the oppressions they had to undergo at the hands of the local religious and civil authorities on account of their believing in the law of Moses.”
Nathan Jackson
No, for the belief that "holy oil" allows the Holy Spirit to enter into you after baptismal water washes away your sins.
Angel Perry
By that it's meant they were forbidden from Church or Communion and clergy often preached against socializing with them and encouraged ostracizing. Which might be pretty bad, but it's not really persecution in the stronger sense of locking them up or burning them.
No one believes that. The Holy Oil is the expression of the Spirit entering you, as is the Baptism. Just getting baptized, for instance, doesn't do anything, unless it's within the Church and the Spirit. But your baptism can be made retroactively valid, if it was outside the Church, upon your reception, when you receive the Spirit.
We don't think like Catholics in terms of a Sacrament being "valid" based on proper custom. There is a right way and a wrong way to perform a Sacrament (for instance, Baptism should always be by triple immersion), but its validity ultimately has zero to do with this, it has to do with whether or not the Sacrament is of the Spirit. Just performing the custom by itself does not make the Sacrament valid, and incorrectly performing the custom doesn't of itself invalidate the Sacrament (unless it is performed in a way that denies Christ's teachings, such as a non-Trinitarian baptism)
It's like Moses parting the Red Sea: you can't just part it by performing his staff motions, the Sea was parted by the Holy Spirit, but the Holy Spirit chooses to do it through Moses, just like the Holy Spirit chooses to perform Sacraments through the Church.
> The Russian Orthodox Church punished their heresy — Christian- Judaizers.
By the way, looking these guys up brought the attention of the Strigolniki, who, by the way, also go persecuted by guys like the archbishop of Novgorod.
But I'm sure you have bizarre doublethink at the ready.
William Torres
>No one believes that.
>I believe that.
Carson Rogers
>or instance, Baptism should always be by triple immersion)
kek
Daily Reminder that the Daily Reminder needs to be re-read.
Cameron James
That's odd. the bible says the sea was parted by a strong east wind. Is your Holy Spirit a strong east wind?
Aiden Hall
Jesus wasn't born from anal sex, Constantine. Repent your heresy.
Jonathan Russell
Which is tied to Moses stretching his hand over it.
No, just stealing a bottle of holy oil and Chrismating people won't do anything. And if, for some reason, a Christmation needed to be done but there was possibility of getting holy oil, that would not make Chrismation impossible. Holy Oil is used to anoint people to God because God taught that since the Old Testament (Psalm 23:5, for instance).
Samuel Gray
What is this stale meme? Obviously no Orthodox, or any other Christian, even, believes this.
Jayden Adams
Orthodox aren't Christian
Jaxson Brown
Er, you said it was the Holy Spirit. Now you say Moses is so powerful that stretching his hand forth parts seas.
Maybe you should be worshiping Moses.
Nothing in the Orthodox church is holy, unless you happen to have a few proper bibles lying about.
Jack Roberts
I think it goes back to some foul things the Jews wrote in their talmud about Jesus and Mary back in the day.
Brayden Long
Constantine is a local transsexual who believes Mary told him to become a woman in a dream. He converted to Catholicism so he could become an Eastern Orthodox monk.
He believes that Jesus was born as an ass baby. It's his way of solving the virgin birth.
Please, do try to lurk before posting.
Michael White
No, I said the Holy Spirit worked through Moses
Cooper Thomas
The One Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic, and Orthodox Church is the One Church going back directly to the Apostles and Christ, based on the teachings of Christ through Christ and the Apostles according to the Gospels. There is only one Church that keeps all the sacraments, is without innovations or subtractions, and spreads the acceptance of the Love of God and Christ. The heresy of Catholicism, as history has shown, has spread via the sword, conquest, and spreading the worship of the Bishop of Rome, not God. The Roman Empire ("Byzantine") spread Christianity through missionaries, not the sword.
Luke Wilson
I've lurked plenty, Christianity threads are the best on Veeky Forums, fun and a few facts sprinkled here and there. Becoming a Monastic..? How would becoming a Roman Catholic help anyone in any way become a Monastic of the Orthodox Church?
Aiden Foster
>is without innovations or subtractions Innovation on the part of the non-Old Believers clearly exist, though. Otherwise you wouldn't have this thread trying to explain them away.
Try keeping your doublethink from turning into tripplethink, Constantine.
Lincoln Turner
>Christianity threads are the best on Veeky Forums
That's a strong lie you're capable of
Easton Peterson
And yet, I can't help but note that the bible says it was a strong east wind.
Oh, wait, now I get it.
You don't know what the bible says. You just make stuff up.
Eli Harris
Those are the claims, yes. They're lies from the pit of hell.
Zachary Turner
From a constantine post back in July. Just go through Desuarchive for
"Hypostatic union" in the OP post.
Jaxson Edwards
I bet you'd correct Belushi when he said it wasn't over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor.
Sebastian Barnes
I'm not Constantine, I'm not Orthodox, I'm a Catholic undergoing Chrysimation from Roman Catholicism to Orthodoxy. Regardless, I know little about the Old Believers as I haven't read too much into the autocephalous Russian Orthodox Church or the Old Believers breaking off after the Patriarch of Moscow made changes unilaterally. Oh? Pretty sure that's all the innovations of the Roman Catholic Church, spawning from Satan as well with his promises of worldly power and conquest.
