Which baptism is true and correct? About the Old Believers and the importance of immersion baptism.

Priest's answer:

You have two canonical obstacles to baptizing your son: you yourself were baptized in a schismatic church - the Old Believers, and the father of the child is not baptized. Regarding the first obstacle: any Sacrament accepted in the Old Believer Church (in a church that fell away from Orthodoxy back in the 17th century) is not valid, that is, it does not impart grace-filled sanctification to the person receiving it. This happens due to the fact that among the Old Believers, priests and bishops do not have the so-called apostolic succession of ordination, through which they could give the grace-filled Gifts of Pentecost to the believers. In essence, the Old Believer hierarchy is self-sanctified (illegally consecrated themselves to sacred degrees). Regarding the second obstacle: in order to baptize a child, both parents must be baptized in Orthodoxy. Otherwise, if they themselves are not members of the Church, how will they engage in his churching and religious education? What is the way out of this situation? – You need the rite of joining from the Old Believers to Orthodoxy. To complete it, go to any Orthodox priest, explain to him your situation, and he will make this connection. It is necessary for your husband to receive the Sacrament of Baptism in the Orthodox Church. It can be performed simultaneously with the Baptism of the son. To do this, please agree with the priest near the local church that you and your spouse will undergo Catechetical Conversations before Baptism. Listen to these conversations and you can join Orthodoxy, and baptize the child and his father. I just want to warn you about one thing. According to Rev. Simeon the New Theologian: “in Baptism, Christ Himself in the form of a seed enters the human heart and rests in it.” Baptism is the sowing of the seed of Eternal Life in the human heart. Like an ordinary seed, you need to water it, hill it up, fertilize it, pull out the weeds around it so that it can germinate and bear fruit. Likewise, the grace of the Sacrament of Baptism must be protected and heated, like in a lamp, for it to burn, it is necessary to constantly add oil, otherwise it will go out. And for this, after being baptized, visit church on Sundays and holidays and participate in the Sacraments of Confession and Communion, read the Gospel and try to implement its commandments in your life, fight your sinful habits. Therefore, both your joining Orthodoxy and the Baptism of your child and husband should not turn into a formality: just being registered in the Church, but not living in it. For this, the most serious preparation is necessary: ​​intellectual (theoretical acquaintance with the Orthodox doctrine) and spiritual (regular attendance at divine services, prayer to God with a request that He would reveal himself to you and enter your life). And if you do not foresee such changes in your life and in your relationship with God, it would be more honest to leave everything as it is (not join Orthodoxy and not be baptized). God help you!

Part 1

Host: The whole of last year was filled in the media (mainly in secular ones) with some kind of hysteria that the coming year is the year of the end of the world. How do you feel about this kind of information? Maybe our Orthodox people have some kind of embarrassment, there was a powerful wave that this is the last year of the existence of humanity?

O. Kirill: Our community, as you know, takes an anti-globalist position; this has long been known and heard for a long time. Now we have certain difficulties in connection with re-registration. Nevertheless, we tend to be sober in these matters. As for setting the dates for the end of the world, we know from Holy Scripture that no one knows about that day and hour. The signs are known, but setting deadlines is unnecessary. We need to live as if any year, day, or even hour could be our last and, accordingly, stay awake and not give in to any temptations. As for the results of the year. Of course, the church aspect is closer to me, although almost every day my assistants from ten sites produce voluminous material about the most important events in the world. As for the church aspect. The past year has been very eventful. The meeting of the Moscow clergy, held as usual at the end of December in the Cathedral of Christ the Savior, was very fruitful and proceeded dynamically. His Holiness the Patriarch summed up the impressive results of the year. The meeting was very lively. In past years, statistics were provided that were generally of a reference nature. In his report, the Patriarch placed this material interlinearly and cited only the main figures. There are 850 units - churches, monasteries, farmsteads - in our capital city. May God grant you to remember this number. Others also spoke at this meeting: bishops and priests. The Patriarch answered questions at the end of the meeting. It was very valuable that there were answers to the questions that concern the Moscow clergy.

Another figure was remembered, voiced at this meeting - that over the past year, 23 new dioceses appeared in our Church on the territory of the Russian Federation, and 3 dioceses outside it, for a total of 26. At the very end of December there was a two-day Synod at which Tver, Novgorod, Arkhangelsk, and Novosibirsk metropolises and even more dioceses. In total there are significantly more than 30 of them. It turns out that 3 new church formations arose per month. Large dioceses began to be divided into 2 or even 3 parts most often. On the territory of the Tver region, for example, dioceses appeared with centers in Rzhev and Bezhetsk. This process is justified, natural, and it should lead to more fruitful results of church work. What other events did you remember over the past year? For me, the meeting of the Synod was very important, at which it was decided to open churches, prayer houses, rooms everywhere, install worship crosses and organize church life around these places with a lay order, i.e. The laity themselves, in the absence of the opportunity for a priest to be in these places, must, using manuals, for example, those published by the Danilov Monastery, read what a layman can do according to the charter, read some teachings, and thus these people living in such populated areas in points that do not have permanent churches, they will not be separated from the conciliar prayer of all our people.

I somehow fantasized: let’s say I’m a dean somewhere in the outback of Russia - in the Yaroslavl or Kostroma region. I go to service on Sunday, at 8 or 9 o’clock in the morning, to the sound of bells ringing, and my soul is warmed by the knowledge that at the same time in all populated areas of the deanery, where in a house, where in a still ruined the temple, where at the worship cross, called, sometimes to the bell, and sometimes to the rail, streams of people walk, stretch out, to be at the prayerful presence of God on Sunday. Back in the 90s, I had a memorandum on this topic, which was handed over to the then manager of the affairs of the Moscow Patriarchate, Metropolitan Sergius of Voronezh. It was very nice that after a few years this idea found a response. It is very important to note that a program to build 200 churches in Moscow has begun to be implemented. Some data in this regard were announced at the meeting - that more than 20 plots have already been allocated in Moscow for the construction of these churches. On Dubrovka, where the famous terrorist attack took place, as I understand it, the construction of a temple in honor of St. Cyril and Methodius - the first temple in honor of these saints of God in our capital city. Our community is involved in these plans, in one of the points where the construction of the temple is planned - in Novoperedelkino. We were invited by the leadership of the people's headquarters to support the construction of 200 temples. In principle, these land plots are ownerless. And the fact that, let’s say, there are parking lots there now or these land plots are used in some other way - all this has not been formalized, so the Patriarchate has every right to follow through with what is provided by the city authorities.

Leading: That is, someone’s material interest is affected.

O. Kirill: There is no doubt that there is such a subtext. I would also say that the past year was important for me personally because I, together with members of my community, had the opportunity to repeatedly perform prayer services according to the old rite, not only in several churches in the capital, but also in my small homeland in the Donbass, in my homeland father in the Voronezh region, at the relics of St. Tikhon of Zadonsk. He also served these prayer services in Georgia, on Mount Athos and on Mount Sinai. I would also like to note that the past year was marked by increased activity in the Ukrainian direction. 5 visits of His Holiness the Patriarch were made to Ukraine, in particular to Bukovina. For the first time, the Patriarch visited the Lugansk diocese. For the first time on this trip I was invited by the Patriarch and took part in the celebration of the liturgy in the central square of Lugansk. A cathedral will be built there. The Patriarch's trip to Syria was important. In principle, these are traditional visits of the newly elected Head of the Church to fraternal Local Orthodox Churches. His Holiness the Patriarch visited Syria at a difficult moment; we all know about the events that are taking place there. He supported the Orthodox Christians there.

We know from Scripture that it was here in Antioch that believers in Christ were first called Christians. I would like such a problem as performing baptism, which according to the canons should be performed by complete immersion, so that this problem would be more actively resolved. Much has already been done. It is gratifying that in the Moscow Patriarchate we see this trend, in contrast to the unrecognized Kyiv Patriarchate. I remember, in a conversation with the head of this formation, I heard the following words: we are an Orthodox Church with pouring baptism. Well, this is, of course, nonsense. This is a very important question, this is one of those mediastinums that representatives of the old faith, Old Believers, pay attention to. If we touch on the social aspect, we can recall, for example, the attempt of the Kosovo Serbs to obtain Russian citizenship, however, without losing their citizenship. I would like to remind you that February 15 is Serbian Statehood Day. On this day, Kosovo Serbs intend to loudly declare their rights and their problems. About joining the WTO, just read a selection of publications on what negative consequences await us. On December 4, on the Feast of the Introduction, we had elections. In principle, I have never prescribed anything to my parishioners on what they should do in matters of accepting or not accepting modern documents with globalist symbols, numbers, etc., as well as regarding participation in public life. On this day, several members of our church community and I were in a Moscow church, where we prayed for Russian patriots who, accused of violating Article 282, the “Russian” article, are in prison. We especially prayed for them and for those who are in danger of ending up in places not so remote. I mean the co-chairman of the Union of Orthodox Brotherhoods, the head of the Union “Christian Revival” Vladimir Nikolaevich Osipov.

Here’s another thing: the so-called “Arab Spring”, which swept through a number of countries in the Arab East: Egypt, Tunisia, Yemen, Libya. For the Christians living here, these events had negative consequences. This was stated in the statement of Bishop Hilarion and His Holiness the Patriarch himself. Recently, Egyptian imams demanded that Coptic television cease to exist. Dmitry Rogozin was appointed to our military-industrial complex (military-industrial complex), while Surkov was transferred from the Presidential Administration to the Government Office as Deputy Prime Minister for Modernization - an interesting and noteworthy event. I once briefly watched a couple of times the performances at an ethnographic festival, where the dances of the peoples living on the territory of Russia were shown. I was surprised that the presenter was Mikhail Efimovich Shvydkoy. You know, somehow his leadership, his remarks, his performances at this holiday looked somewhat artificial. I wouldn’t be surprised if in one of the next similar programs Mikhail Efimovich appears in a blouse, and next to him is a presenter similar to him... in a sundress. These are the metamorphoses that can be observed in our lives.

Leading: We are moving towards the Old Believers. Yes, Father? So let's start the conversation with the question of where did you personally get such a keen interest in the Old Believers? And why do you so sincerely advocate, so to speak, for filling our church life with rituals, the ritual side of the Old Believer period of our Church?

Father Kirill: I write in detail about how I developed such an interest in the first part of my memoirs. I am a native of Donbass and in the Lugansk region, where I was born, the only Old Believer church was in the village of Gorodishche, Perevalsky district, where I am from. My relatives live there, I visited them. My coming to the Church happened around the age of 13. At the same time, it was accompanied by contact with the world of the Old Believers. Firstly, this is Katunsky’s book from the series “Modern Religions” - “Old Believers” - that’s what it was called. I remember studying this entire series when I was in high school. When I first began to visit the church in our regional center in the city of Alchevsk, now, by the way, the ruling Bishop, Metropolitan Ioaniky, bears the title of Lugansk and Alchevsk, I was struck by the otherworldliness of the atmosphere in the church. That is, there is bustle and noise around, but there, inside the temple, there is silence, the flickering of lamps, the fragrance of incense. By the way, this was a unique smell from my church childhood; I never encountered it again in my subsequent life. Some kind of indescribable smell that will be remembered for a lifetime.

Leading: And you, father, did you have Old Believers among your relatives or is this your personal impulse?

O. Kirill: No, there was no one. My father is from the Voronezh region, which began to be settled in the Peter the Great era by immigrants from various Russian provinces. At one time I had an assumption that my father’s immigrants from the Oryol region settled on the free Voronezh lands, having been forced to do so due to persecution for the old faith. This assumption fueled the names of the villages that they formed, for example, Eryshevka. “Rubby people” - this is what you can say about the Old Believers - they are like that among them. However, no monuments of material culture in the form of cast eight-pointed crosses or very old icons were discovered in this Eryshevka, where our community gave impetus to the revival of the local Kazan temple. By the way, on Voronezh land we gave impetus to the revival of 12 rural churches, installed 13 worship crosses, and opened two houses of worship. So I have no roots, only reading books, meetings, personal observations and impressions. Last year, Sergei Nikolaevich, the Stoglavy Cathedral celebrated its 460th anniversary. It took place in 1551 during the reign of the young Ivan the Terrible under Metropolitan Macarius, who was canonized by our Church in the year of the 1000th anniversary of the Baptism of Rus'. At this Council, church life was streamlined: 100 chapters, 100 points of decisions were made - hence the name “Hundred-Glavy Council”.

Question from a listener about the Old Believers: are they within the bosom of the Church? And how does the priest feel about Patriarch Nikon: is he worthy to be canonized?

O. Kirill: Regarding the first question, it is a well-known fact that in most cases each denomination considers itself the only exceptional one. We are part of the Orthodox Church, we are members of one of the 16 Local Churches that form the Universal Orthodox Church. The Old Believers, in turn, believe that they have the fullness of churchliness. As for Patriarch Nikon, in my opinion, to put it mildly, there are no such grounds. No matter how good his motives for carrying out the reform were, we judge by the results, don’t we? And the result is sad: a large number of not the worst Russian people did not accept this reform and were subjected to repression. The wound of church schism is bleeding on the body of our Church to this day. In addition, read the text of the official accusation against Nikon, signed by Patriarch Joachim. This document lists facts of Nikon’s behavior that are contrary to moral standards. In general, these questions are global, I would suggest descending to a simpler level, namely: if serious mediastinums have arisen in the relations between us, leading to separation, then we need to understand why this happened? In the end, we need to start a systematic conversation, at least with the history of the issue - where did it all begin? How should we treat, for example, Bishop Pavel of Kolomna, who was repressed for disagreeing with the reforms? If Habakkuk and others like him were burned for “great blasphemies against the royal house,” i.e. for political crimes, then perhaps the descendants of the Romanov dynasty should repent for such a brutal form of repression and thereby set an example for the church authorities? And then, if at the top of the church everyone hesitates and does not dare to express regret and repentance for persecution, perhaps this process should begin from below - both in private confessions and in general - say, to parishes and monasteries on Forgiveness Sunday? This is exactly what our community did several years ago. In general, I have always been a pessimist about the prospects for restoring unity with the Old Believers. This, of course, does not mean that nothing needs to be done. One thing is clear: if by some miracle this had happened on the solid foundation of fidelity to church truth without any pressure or trickery, the heavens would have rejoiced, and this would have become a powerful impulse for our revival.

Leading: Father, you are talking quite persistently about the revival of two-fingered fingers, in particular in church life, won’t this lead to some kind of disorder, a split within church life, if this begins to be introduced everywhere, etc.?

O. Kirill: The vast majority of our parishioners are completely unaware of this issue, and there are quite a few of them among the clergy and bishops. For them, theoretically, it doesn’t matter how to be baptized, and, therefore, there is no point in breaking spears. There are, of course, those who believe that double-fingering is a delusion, almost a heresy, that the reform of Patriarch Nikon eliminated ignorance and brought our liturgical structure in line with the original models, with the way people were baptized throughout the Orthodox world. This is not true. This cliche has long been refuted by Orthodox researchers, such as, for example, professors of the Moscow Theological Academy Kapterev and Golubinsky. We see the widespread and initial spread of double fingers in Greece, and in Rome and Venice, on Mount Athos, not to mention Russia. So, for example, on all the icons attributed to the brush of the Evangelist Luke, the fingers of the Infant Christ are folded with two fingers. We see two fingers: on the bronze statue of Christ in the temple of St. Peter and Paul in Rome, on the mosaics of the Ravenna Church of the New Appolinary (VI century), on the mosaic image “The Descent of the Holy Spirit on the Apostles” in one of the domes of the Sophia Church in Constantinople (also VI century), on the Korsun icon of the Mother of God, painted only five years after the baptism of Rus' on a mosaic icon in Venice in the Church of St. ap. Mark (XI century) and above the main entrance to the cathedral in Montreal (XIII century), on the Petrine Icon of the Mother of God in the sacristy of the Trinity-Sergius Lavra (XIV century), on the image of St. Sergius of Radonezh on the frame of the Gospel (1392).

The Council of the Hundred Heads in 1551 even protected the use of double-fingered fingers with an oath. By the way, the text of this oath is taken almost verbatim from the ancient Greek consumer manual.

The first All-Russian Patriarch Job writes about double-fingering in his letter to the Georgian Metropolitan Nikola. When I took care of St. Basil's Cathedral in the 90s, I always paid attention to the ancient image of St. Basil in the iconostasis with his hand raised with two fingers for the sign of the cross.

In Little Russia, a reform similar to Nikon’s was carried out without any shocks under Metropolitan Peter Mogila (30-40s of the 17th century).

However, back in the 20s of the 17th century, well-known authoritative books published in Kyiv spoke about double-fingeredness (“Book of Faith”, “Big Catechism”, etc.). By the way, reunification with Little Russia also influenced the Nikon reform - with the aim of standardizing Liturgical rites in a single state. That is, there is an imperial subtext when church truth is sacrificed to political considerations. We see double fingers on the relics of St. Blessed Princess Anna Kashinskaya and St. Ilya Muromets. At the same time, we do not find practically any authoritative evidence in favor of triplicate.

Double-fingeredness, even purely visually, with its very solemn appearance, attracts hearts. I'm not even talking about the theological content: here the Trinity is depicted, since the work of our salvation was accomplished by the One God glorified in the Trinity. The Father deigned to send the Son to suffer on the cross, the Son redeemed us on the cross, and the Holy Spirit assimilates to us the redemptive fruits of Christ’s Sacrifice. But it was Christ who was crucified, not the Trinity. Isn’t it therefore more logical to place exactly two fingers, signifying the God-Man, on the forehead? Please note that on the icon of the Mother of God “Sovereign” the fingers of the Infant Christ are also folded with two fingers. It’s time to stop the discrepancy, when the same saint is depicted by different icon painters either with two fingers or with the so-called naming. Well, I just watched a video about the outstanding ascetic of the 20th century, Elder Sampson. An icon of an old man with two fingers was shown.

Leading: They mention St. Seraphim of Sarov, who spoke about the bondage in the next world of those who are baptized with two fingers .

O. Kirill: A couple of years ago we made a pilgrimage to Diveevo. I remember that the dean did not let us go for a long time, she kept asking us to sing again and again according to the old texts in ancient chants.

There are several options for explaining the relationship of the saint. Seraphim on this issue. In my opinion, they all have a right to exist. This is also a variant of later insertions into the life in the spirit of the official line, just as they massively covered up the two-finger blessing on old frescoes and icons and depicted the name-word (the patches are still visible).

The assumptions about the crypto-Old Believers of St. Seraphim, that is, about his secret sympathy for ancient piety, as B.P. Kutuzov writes about. In fact, how was it possible in the first third of the 19th century in an ordinary monastery to so simply wear an “Old Believer” half-robe and an Old Russian lestovka? Was this an outward expression of his inner positive attitude? It is reasonable to assume that this was not largely the reason for the persecution of the elder? And then, could Rev. Seraphim, for example, when speaking about the connection in the next world of those who are baptized with two fingers, does he mean the faithful children of the Church who adhere to the old rite in its bosom since 1800? And finally, let us remind you again that in any case, the conciliar position is higher than private opinion, no matter how authoritative it is expressed. By the way, in our church there is an icon of St. Seraphim of pre-revolutionary writing with double fingers.

When they talk about embarrassment in connection with the statements of people whom the Church canonized, I ask: “What about the recently canonized Metropolitan Filaret (Drozdov), who consecrated several dozen churches of the same faith, who claimed that those who entered the bosom of the Church with rights unity of faith, oaths do not apply? And the holy martyr. Benjamin, who looked after the Edinoverie churches of the Petrograd Metropolis, being a suffragan bishop? And St. Patriarch Tikhon, who ordained the first four bishops for fellow believers? And what about the bishop of the same faith, Simon (Shleev), glorified both by the Church Abroad and the Moscow Patriarchate as a new martyr? And the Edinoverie dean of the Moscow diocese, Rev. Is Constantine from Bogorodsk (present-day Noginsk) also a new martyr?

In my opinion, the first thing that is needed now is repentance. This is the first thing that needs to be done urgently, as the Russian Church Abroad did at its Council in 2000. Look what happens, many thousands of zealots of ancient piety have been repressed. There are indisputable documents about the involvement of clergy of the official Church in these persecutions. There were quite ferocious persecutions during the reigns of Princess Sophia and Anna Ioannovna, Nicholas I, not to mention Peter I. From the reign of Catherine II and then Paul I, there was a process of gradual revision of the attitude towards the ancient Russian liturgical way of life, as having serious distortions. The Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church in 1929 abolished the terrible oaths on the old rites. The Council of 1971 approved this decision. And now the Old Believers are being told: let’s fraternize, join us, what are you still missing?

How so? Streams of blood were shed by those who were against the dubious Nikon reform, which introduced Latin influence into our church body, a “Western scab,” in the words of Bishop. Ignatius (Brianchaninova). Opponents of the reform, who defended their native piety, which came to us from Byzantium along with baptism, were called schismatics, heretics, and criminals. They cut off fingers for the two-fingered sign of the cross, tore out nostrils, quartered them, etc., and now they say that there was a mistake, they looked at it somewhat narrowly, one-sidedly, you can pray either way. Then why the fuss, why did so many Russian people die? When they now say, let’s not delve into the past, let’s be friends - this reminds me of a situation when two neighbors quarreled, one insulted and beat the other, and then says: let’s forget, let’s be friends. Will such an approach be fruitful? Shouldn't we first ask for forgiveness and reconcile? This would be a very serious step forward, it would help to “relax tensions”, weakening the “post-traumatic shock” from severe persecution, which is transmitted at the genetic level. And then, of course, we need to return to the pre-Nikon liturgical structure in its entirety. Take, for example, the Book of Psalms. Modern researchers (Kutuzov, Smirnov, etc.) compared the edition of the old Psalter with the new one, and in almost 100 percent of cases they give preference to the old edition.

It would seem that what difference does it make to amplify the alleluia, that is, to sing it two or three times. Well, look what happens. The special alleluia was approved by the Council of the Stoglavy in 1551 on the basis of the vision of St. Euphrosynus of Pskov to the Mother of God, who commanded him to do this and forbade him to sing differently. Not only does the pure alleluia have the authority of a canonized saint, there is also a conciliar statement.

And what are the participants of the Great Moscow Council of 1666-1667 doing, among whom there was not a single saint, but there were crooks like Metropolitan Paisius Ligarid of Gaza? They impose terrible oaths on our ancient piety, abolish a number of decisions of the Stoglavo Council, allegedly taken out of recklessness and ignorance. It got to the point that Rev. Euphrosynus of Pskov was decanonized in 1683, as was St. St. Anna Kashinskaya. By the way, one of the New Love bishops unbent the fingers of the saint’s relics, folded into two fingers, and tried to fold them into three fingers, but they stubbornly folded as before. Then they decided to abolish the canonization of the saint. And laughter and sin! Here is another example, the Creed. In its seventh member, for example, where it speaks of the Kingdom of Christ. In the old edition it was: “His Kingdom has no end,” i.e. in the present tense, but in the new edition it sounds - “His Kingdom will have no end” - that is, the same as with Catholics - in the future tense. This change introduces ambiguity, allowing us to believe that the eternal Kingdom of Christ with its incarnation, atoning sacrifice on the Cross and Resurrection has not yet arrived, but will only come in the future. This, by the way, echoes the Jewish idea that the Messiah will come into the world and reign in it. In the eighth term, the word “True” was omitted in the application to the Holy Spirit. But Christ Himself applies this word to the Holy Spirit (John 14.17). After all, this word emphasizes the equality of the Holy Spirit with the other Persons of the Holy Trinity. In general, when comparing the old and new texts, one gets the feeling that the books were “corrected” only for the sake of making everything in them different from what it was before. Patriarch Nikon tells Arseny the Greek (book corrector), a student of the Jesuit college in Rome, to correct the books “somehow, as long as not in the old way,” which is what he did.

Or such a detail as printing on a prosphora. Before the reform, the seal carried all the information about the Savior: that He is the King of Glory, the Son of God, the Savior of the human race, the Anointed of God. That He was crucified, resurrected, and conquered death by death. After the reform, the press became different, saying nothing about Christ crucified and risen. The fact of deterioration is obvious.

Listener question: Speaking on Radio Radonezh, in a conversation with N. Kartasheva, you talked about Rev. Seraphim of Sarov: “If he did not honor us, then we do not honor him.” There is, of course, pride in this answer.

O. Kirill: I want to remind you that our parish of St. St. Nicholas on Bersenevka is an Old Believer parish of the Moscow Patriarchate. We have the official blessing of the Patriarch to practice the old rite in the Divine services of our temple. As for your statement that I allegedly said this about Rev. Seraphim, I can definitely say that I did not say such words. In our church there is an icon of St. Seraphim with two fingers, by the way, from a pre-revolutionary letter. We treat this saint of God with complete respect.

Leading: And in percentage terms, what place do Old Believers occupy in Russia now? How many are there anyway?

O. Kirill: As you know, approximately 1/3 of the residents of the Moscow state did not accept church reforms in the 17th century. Pre-revolutionary official statistics are as follows: in the Russian Empire there lived more than a million Old Believers-priests and non-priests. In fact, multiply by an order of magnitude more. Now there is a figure of one million Old Believers living in Russia, Ukraine, Belarus, Moldova, Romania, the USA, Australia, Latin American countries, etc.

Leading: Save me, God. We will return to the topic of Old Believers probably after Christmas. If God willing, we will meet in this studio and make another broadcast. Once again, we congratulate all of you, dear brothers and sisters, on the occasion of the Nativity of Christ and wish you all the very best.

Part 2

Presenter: The famous poet of the Silver Age N. Klyuev gravitated toward the Old Believers. It is known about him that he supported Bolshevism, considering it as a breakthrough of the people's will, as a force that overthrew the German Romanov yoke, a return to origins. It is believed that the majority of Old Believers supported this idea. Of course, this does not mean Bolshevism of Trotsky and Kamenev, but of this national type. What do you think about it?

O. Kirill: Last time, concluding the conversation about the Old Believers, you, Sergei Nikolaevich, raised the question of the attitude of the Old Believers to the monarchy, their participation in various popular movements, peasant uprisings, etc.

Host: Yes, maybe their participation was the result of accumulated resentment, injustice towards them, which led to such an outburst.

O. Kirill: In principle, they are monarchists. For example, they honor Mikhail Romanov as the last tsar who was pious - so they say. The very idea of ​​monarchism is not rejected by them. Living in the Russian Empire, they experienced different attitudes towards themselves from the ruling monarchs. Their position under Catherine II, Paul I on the one hand, and under Nicholas I was significantly different. I'm not even talking about Nicholas II, under whom a decree on religious tolerance was issued in 1905. The period from 1905 to 1917 is called the “golden age of the Old Believers.” Then the Old Believers built hundreds of churches, published newspapers, their famous choirs performed, etc. You talked about Klyuev, about the national-Bolshevik tendency, but I would like to dig deeper. For example, Razin, the peasant war under his leadership. This is cited as evidence of anti-monarchist sentiment among the Old Believers. You know, but in fact it is not known for sure whether Razin was an Old Believer. Yes, many fought on his side, for example, Cossacks who did not accept Nikon’s reforms. It is obvious that the main motives of the rebels were social. What is also important is the rebels’ appeal to Patriarch Nikon to become the banner of the uprising. This alone contradicts the idea of ​​the “Old Believer character” of the Razin uprising. In the Pugachev movement we also do not see an emphasis on the old faith. It is known that Pugachev was baptized not by the Old Believers, but in an ordinary church. As for Kondraty Bulavin, his uprising, this is already the time of Peter’s reign, there - yes, Old Believer motives are more visible. By the way, the epicenter of the uprising was the territory of what is now the Lugansk region of Ukraine, where I am from. If you go back to the 20th century, during the years of the Civil War, do you know that in Siberia, for example, the regiments of Jesus, consisting of Old Believers, actively fought the Reds?

Host: No, I didn’t know.

O. Kirill: Old Believers, as a rule, were strong, wealthy owners, those who were called kulaks - they were given such a label, and therefore they, their communities, the enclaves of their residence were subjected to repression in the first place. As well as fellow believers - those who practiced the old rite in the bosom of the Orthodox Church. They were viewed as a socially alien element. In general, the Old Believers were supporters of a conservative way of life. They, of course, did not have the most pleasant memories of their lives during the reign of individual monarchs and, most likely, by taking part in the above-mentioned movements, they hoped to get rid of discriminatory restrictions against the old faith and freely follow it. The second part of my memoirs contains my correspondence with Fr. Lev Lebedev, who has long since passed on to another world. We met him at the Danilov Monastery in 1984. He wrote to me about Guchkov and Ryabushinsky, who had contacts with enemies of the throne. About Savva Morozov, who at one time supported revolutionaries with money. By the way, he did not commit suicide at all, but was killed because he stopped supplying seditious people with money and began to move away from them. The suicide was inspired. The Old Believers are very scrupulous in these matters; they conducted a thorough investigation, after which S. Morozov was inveterate. All this is discussed in detail in the latest issue of the Old Believer magazine “Church”.

Host: Father, let's talk about something else now. During the Soviet hard times, when the Church was in a rather difficult situation, in the performance of such an important Sacrament as baptism, the practice of performing it through pouring spread. Why do you attach such great importance to this issue? I have heard opinions that this issue is of secondary importance.

O. Kirill: As far as I understand, our conversation today is final and therefore it is logical, in the context of the topic of the Old Believers, to touch on this issue. It would be frivolous, speaking about disagreements with the Old Believers, not to touch upon the issue of baptism. As for the opinion that this issue is of secondary importance, I do not agree with this. In general, everything that concerns matters of faith is important. Let us remember the words of the Savior: “This must be done and not forsaken.” Baptism is the door leading to the saving fence of the Church. Its implementation requires a particularly careful approach. The Holy Fathers strictly warn about the danger of missing something from the rite of baptism. As for immersion, immersion itself is baptism, because it is known that baptism is translated from Greek as “immersion.”

Host: Is immersion really that important?

O. Kirill: This is the main moment when not only symbolic, but also real co-death and co-resurrection with Christ occurs. The fiftieth Apostolic Canon states that if a priest does not baptize in three immersions, he will be deposed. An interesting detail: at the beginning of the last century, the famous Old Believer figure Bishop Arseny of Uralsky carefully examined the rite of baptism and made small rearrangements in it, making minor changes to it that seemed more logical to him. The Council, however, rejected this, i.e. Particular scrupulousness was shown in this matter. Saints Basil the Great, John Chrysostom, Cyril of Jerusalem, Gregory of Nyssa and others speak about immersion. Complete immersion in water is a complete surrender of oneself to Christ. The external ritual reflects the internal spiritual state. One zealot for the canons collected evidence from three hundred sources about the necessity of immersion during baptism. Our Councils - Vladimir in 1274, the Council of 1620 under Patriarch Filaret, not to mention Stoglav - everyone speaks strictly about immersion. But the Council of 1667, which approved the Nikon reform, abolished the acceptance of Latins through baptism as Oblivans. Even after this, Patriarch Andrian and a number of bishops of the synodal period were jealous of immersion baptism, for example, Astrakhan Archbishop Nikifor Feotoki, buried in the Danilov Monastery. In the 90s of the last century, the Barnaul and Lugansk diocesan administrations issued circulars instructing priests to baptize through immersion. There was a circular from Odessa Metropolitan Agafangel about the same thing several years ago. I remembered how last year, during a meeting with the head of the unrecognized Kyiv Patriarchate Filaret Denisenko, I raised this issue. He amazed me with his response: “We are the Orthodox Church with pouring baptism.” Well, here, forgive me, I “lost the chain”, because this is my “strong point”, I have been raising this topic for many years. I began to talk passionately about this, my interlocutor noticeably tensed. Well, in fact, the Orthodox Church with pouring baptism is nonsense. After all, dousing is permissible only as a last resort. In 25 years of my priestly ministry, I have only had this happen once - I baptized a seriously ill person in a hospital ward. He could barely stand. I doused him with water from a bucket three times. Once he baptized a paralyzed man. I managed to immerse him in the bath three times.

I am not yet touching on the problems of catechesis, the fact that water should be alive, and not boiled - dead. I’m not saying that baptism is a conciliar matter, a holiday for the entire community, and it should not be performed quickly somewhere in the corner of the church. Sometimes the case of sand baptism is cited to justify pouring baptism. This is described in the book “Spiritual Meadow”. Walking through the desert, the monks converted a young Jew to faith, who then fell ill at night. The brothers “baptized” him with sand, and when they came to the bishop, he ordered the Jew “baptized” with sand to be baptized in water, imputing the baptism with sand to nothing. I want to say that baptism is always a special event for me. The priest requires great composure and concentration. You really feel the counteraction of the enemy force. There is never no temptation. I remember reading incantatory prayers at the entrance to the temple in the courtyard of the Danilov Monastery in the village of Dolmatovo, suddenly a huge black dog almost ran into the temple. When new people join the community, many reveal the following: they were baptized without preparation, hastily, prayers of announcement, incantations were read “from the fifth to the tenth.” And after the anniversary - the Millennium of the Baptism of Rus' (late 80s, early 90s), when there were mass baptisms, many were baptized by pouring, by wetting their foreheads, even by sprinkling... You also reveal a lot of all sorts of omissions during confession. Almost every person has some kind of problem. A woman over whom the prayers of the fortieth day were not read is also not a rare occurrence. The quality of church care for people has been reduced; there is a flow, a conveyor belt. Undoubtedly, this influenced the lowering of the spiritual level, the fact that, say, community life is in such an unsatisfactory state.

The practice of our temple is an indispensable preparation for those wishing to be baptized. True, in this regard, very often there is some kind of passivity among people themselves. Sometimes they declare their desire to be baptized in absentia - you immediately insist: please come to the church for the first contact, for a conversation. Sometimes that’s all there is to it, and then all sorts of reminders and invitations to come do not find a response in people’s hearts. I don’t know how other priests manage to organize some kind of preparatory courses for those wishing to be baptized. True, we have our own specifics - the temple is located in the central part of the city, opposite the Cathedral of Christ the Savior, across the Moscow River, on the embankment, where there are no residential areas, which is why there is no such flow of people wanting to be baptized. And those that come are often limited to the first contact and then everything hangs in the air. But in any case, you give people some literature, ask them to read the Gospel, study the basic prayers, and try to carefully perform the baptism itself. Adults who wish to be baptized must certainly confess. Then, after the baptism is over, I invite them to a meal. We schedule a common meal, lunch, to coincide with this moment. Every member of the community congratulates a newborn into spiritual life on this great event, just as those getting married in our church are congratulated on entering into a marriage blessed by the Lord.

In the 25 years of my priesthood, I do not remember a single case where there were no temptations at baptism. Once in the village of Rossypnoye, Voronezh region, I baptized 53 people at once. He baptized in the pond, and then performed confirmation in the temple. The process of anointing is carried out - I anoint all the parts of the body of the baptized according to the order, and I gradually run out of myrrh, and half of the people have not yet been anointed. They had to anoint only their foreheads and tell them to let the local priests finish the rest, at their request. Another case. In the same village, the headman of the church, an immigrant from Uzbekistan, took our parishioner, a Muscovite, as his wife, and settled with her in this village. I married them, they already have three children. They asked me to baptize a baby - a girl. He offered them two options: either in the regional center or in the village. They preferred the temple in the regional center - in the city of Kalach. Baptism there is performed for several people at once, it passes quickly, the water at the bottom of the font is boiled, diluted, “dead,” but according to the Charter there must be natural, “living” water. I’m heading there, and my body is already trembling - how will everything be? What will happen with the water, what will the situation be like, what will the attitude be? But everything went fine. I performed baptism, arrived home for lunch after baptism, and a thought struck me - I forgot to perform one action - walking around the font three times. The enemy hinders, slows down. I’m consulting with an experienced confessor - what should I do? But everything, it turns out, is simple - everything missed during baptism must be made up.

Or here's another one. One mother, the wife of a priest, says: “Take me as your spiritual child.” I ask her: “How was your baptism?” With this I start a conversation with her. “But this is how it is,” he says, “I have a brother who is a priest, a hieromonk. He baptized people of all ages in our village. The baptism was already underway, and then I walked past, and he said to me: “Come here, you will be baptized.” It turns out that she was not at the baptism from the very beginning. At this time they were already anointing with chrism. The priest poured some water on her head... I asked her: “Did he read the prayers of the announcement, the incantations?” They are, after all, very important (children also get sick because these prayers for protection from evil forces were missed), and she answers: “No, I joined when the baptism was already underway...”. Naturally, this needs to be made up. Everything lost must be made up.

Host: Yes, the situation has gone very far. What to do? What are the ways to solve this problem in your opinion?

O. Kirill: Like many other troubles, this comes from the ill-fated Nikon reform, when the strength of church foundations began to shake. Since that time, and especially since the era of Peter the Great, immigrants from Little Russia in large numbers have occupied our bishoprics and the positions of rector of churches and monasteries. Already subjected to Western, Latin powerful influence, they everywhere implanted their usual pouring baptism. The 20th century made the situation worse - both the Renovationists with their liberal approach, and the many “Westerners” who, after the war, entered our theological schools in large numbers and settled in Russia.

Awareness of the seriousness of the situation is already very important. Next, deep repentance is necessary for the blasphemous neglect of this great Sacrament. Every priest and bishop must repent of this sin, this is O It must be done at the cathedral level as well. After this, this outrage will be strictly prohibited in the future, and violators will be severely punished. Oblige the establishment of baptisteries everywhere, especially in cathedrals and large city parishes. Pay the most serious attention to this matter in the programs of theological schools, at diocesan meetings, in church newspapers and magazines.

The late Patriarch Alexy II repeatedly called for the restoration of the immersion method of baptism. In his address to the participants of the congress of the Union of Orthodox Brotherhoods in 1991, the following words attracted attention: “Infants should be baptized in any conditions only by immersion. For the baptism of adults, it is necessary to find the opportunity to establish baptisteries in all churches, and their baptism must be preceded by catechesis.”

So, violations in this regard, to put it mildly, greatly confuse our brothers - the Old Believers. I once visited an old friend of mine, an Old Believer priest, rector of a church in the Moscow region. We have known each other since the 70s, I was then a student at a secular university, and he was a parishioner of the Bezpopovsky prayer house at the Preobrazhenskoye cemetery. We haven't seen each other for several years. When we met, the main topic, as always, was the topic of baptism. Every Old Believer and Old Believer priest has negative baggage from contact with the churches of the Russian Orthodox Church MP. So now, when we meet, there are again examples of baptism in the Kaluga Cathedral without undressing, only by wetting the head... He showed me the book “Father of Samara,” in which there is a photograph of how a venerable clergyman “baptizes,” pouring water from a vessel on head.

It is necessary to categorically prevent such photographs from being included in church publications, and also not to be included in the form of video materials. I will say frankly that every time I encountered such things, I instructed one of the community members to write a letter to someone who did this, enclosing a selection of rules on the topic of immersion baptism.

Host: Father, the service according to the old rite takes longer. How does this fit in with the pace of modern life?

O. Kirill: If we talk about baptism, I can say that, as a rule, everyone was grateful. People noted how unhurried, measured, and uncluttered everything was. Services according to the old rite, of course, take much longer. We begin the all-night vigil with Little Vespers at 15:00 and hear the gospel in the Cathedral of Christ the Savior at the beginning of the service at 17:00. When we reach the climax - reading the Gospel and then venerating it - on the other bank of the Moscow River we hear the peal of the bell at the end of the all-night vigil. Of course, to be honest, not everyone comes to the beginning of the service.

Question from a radio listener: I was baptized by pouring in 1997. Tell me, do I need to do something about this?

O. Kirill: This is how I will answer this question. Let me say right away that I do not pretend to solve this problem on an all-Russian scale. I have my own area - my community, and I solve problems only to this extent, only in relation to those who have chosen me as their confessor. With such people, I thoroughly analyze everything; I do nothing on my own without turning to my confessor. Without knowing you and your circumstances, I cannot say publicly to the whole country, I cannot give a comprehensive answer. I think that it is logical to turn to your confessor, and every person should have a confessor (one who does not have a confessor is called an imperfect Christian in church books). There is a bishop in every diocese. I think that the answers will be different in different places, from different clergy. Most likely, those who do this will say: “It’s no big deal, it’s the same as baptism, the main thing is to have faith,” etc. One priest once answered a questioner on this topic that this sin will be on me, don’t worry, and he answered: “I don’t care about your sins, please perform services as expected.” Everything that was said today on this topic is a kind of food for thought for all of us: me, Sergei Nikolaevich, for the radio listener who just called, for her confessor, if there is one, for the bishop in whose diocese such an incident occurred. Therefore, think, consult, I will not decide these issues for others and will not take responsibility for speaking loudly about it. The Lord entrusted me with a specific flock of verbal sheep and, within the framework of my authority, constantly consulting with my confessor, I resolve these issues.

Host: Father, there are two minutes left before the end of our broadcast. What would you say at the end of our series of programs on the topic of Old Believers?

O. Kirill: If we talk about the prospects of some kind of unification with the Old Believers, then the situation is a dead end, although we would very much like our people to be more united and consolidated. One can, perhaps, talk about some kind of miracle, assume the direct intervention of God in resolving this knot “by their own destinies.” If we talk about things that lie on the surface, then they, it seems to me, are the following: to perform baptism properly, to realize the injustice of the persecution of the zealots of ancient piety, and, having realized it, to express regret and even repentance for this, so that thereby, at least, figuratively speaking, “clear the ground”, prepare the ground for constructive dialogue, and then everything is in God’s hands.

Before starting a conversation about how Old Believers are baptized, we should dwell in more detail on who they are and what their role is in the development of Russian Orthodoxy. The fate of this religious movement, called the Old Believers, or Old Orthodoxy, became an integral part of the history of Russia and is full of drama and examples of spiritual greatness.

The reform that split Russian Orthodoxy

The Old Believers, like the entire Russian Church, consider the beginning of its history to be the year when the light of the Christian faith, brought to Rus' by Equal-to-the-Apostles Prince Vladimir, shone on the banks of the Dnieper. Having fallen on fertile soil, the seed of Orthodoxy sprouted abundantly. Until the fifties of the 17th century, faith in the country was united, and there was no talk of any religious schism.

The beginning of the great church unrest was the reform of Patriarch Nikon, which he began in 1653. It consisted in bringing the Russian liturgical order into conformity with that adopted in the Greek and Constantinople churches.

Reasons for church reform

Orthodoxy, as we know, came to us from Byzantium, and in the first years after, services in churches were performed exactly as was customary in Constantinople, but after more than six centuries, significant changes were made to it.

In addition, since during almost this entire period there was no printing, and liturgical books were copied by hand, they not only contained a significant number of errors, but also the meaning of many key phrases was distorted. To rectify the situation, I made a simple decision that seemed to have no complications.

The Patriarch's Good Intentions

He ordered to take samples of early books brought from Byzantium, and, having re-translated them, replicate them in print. He ordered the previous texts to be withdrawn from circulation. In addition, Patriarch Nikon introduced three fingers in the Greek manner - putting three fingers together when making the sign of the cross.

Such a harmless and completely reasonable decision nevertheless caused a reaction similar to an explosion, and the church reform carried out in accordance with it caused a schism. As a result, a significant part of the population that did not accept these innovations moved away from the official church, which was called Nikonian (named after Patriarch Nikon), and from it a large-scale religious movement emerged, the followers of which began to be called schismatics.

The split that resulted from the reform

As before, in pre-reform times, Old Believers crossed themselves with two fingers and refused to recognize new church books, as well as priests who tried to perform divine services using them. Having stood in opposition to church and secular authorities, they were subjected to severe persecution on their part for a long time. This began in 1656.

Already in the Soviet period, there was a final softening of the position of the Russian Orthodox Church regarding the Old Believers, which was enshrined in relevant legal documents. However, this did not lead to the resumption of Eucharistic, that is, prayerful communication between local and Old Believers. The latter to this day consider only themselves to be carriers of the true faith.

With how many fingers do Old Believers cross themselves?

It is important to note that the schismatics never had canonical disagreements with the official church, and the conflict always arose only around the ritual side of the service. For example, the way Old Believers cross themselves, folding three fingers instead of two, has always become a reason for condemnation against them, while there were no complaints about their interpretation of Holy Scripture or the main provisions of the Orthodox doctrine.

By the way, the order of folding the fingers for the sign of the cross among both the Old Believers and supporters of the official church contains certain symbolism. Old Believers cross themselves with two fingers - the index and middle, symbolizing the two natures of Jesus Christ - divine and human. The remaining three fingers are kept pressed to the palm. They represent the image of the Holy Trinity.

A vivid illustration of how Old Believers are baptized can be seen in the famous painting by Vasily Ivanovich Surikov “Boyaryna Morozova”. In it, the disgraced inspirer of the Moscow Old Believer movement, being taken into exile, raises two fingers folded together to the sky - a symbol of schism and rejection of the reform of Patriarch Nikon.

As for their opponents, supporters of the Russian Orthodox Church, the folding of fingers adopted by them, in accordance with Nikon’s reform, and used to this day, also has a symbolic meaning. Nikonians cross themselves with three fingers - the thumb, index and middle fingers, folded in a pinch (the schismatics contemptuously called them “pinchers” for this). These three fingers also symbolize and the dual nature of Jesus Christ is depicted in this case by the ring finger and little finger pressed to the palm.

Symbolism contained in the sign of the cross

The schismatics always attached special meaning to the way in which they imposed on themselves. The direction of movement of the hand is the same for them as for all Orthodox Christians, but its explanation is unique. Old Believers cross themselves with their fingers, placing them first of all on their foreheads. By this they express the primacy of God the Father, who is the beginning of the Divine Trinity.

Further, by placing their fingers on their stomach, they thereby indicate that Jesus Christ, the Son of God, was immaculately conceived in the womb of the Most Pure Virgin. Then raising his hand to his right shoulder, they indicate that in the Kingdom of God He is seated at the right hand - that is, to the right of His Father. And finally, the movement of the hand to the left shoulder reminds that at the Last Judgment, sinners sent to hell will have a place on the left (to the left) of the Judge.

The answer to this question can be the ancient tradition of the two-fingered sign of the cross, which dates back to apostolic times and was then adopted in Greece. She came to Rus' at the same time as her baptism. Researchers have convincing evidence that during the XI-XII centuries. There was simply no other form of the sign of the cross in the Slavic lands, and everyone was baptized the way the Old Believers do today.

An illustration of what has been said can be the well-known icon “Savior Pantocrator,” painted by Andrei Rublev in 1408 for the iconostasis of the Assumption Cathedral in Vladimir. On it, Jesus Christ is depicted sitting on a throne and raising his right hand in a two-fingered blessing. It is characteristic that it was precisely two, and not three, fingers that the Creator of the world folded in this sacred gesture.

The true reason for the persecution of the Old Believers

Many historians are inclined to believe that the true cause of the persecution was not the ritual features practiced by the Old Believers. Whether followers of this movement cross themselves with two or three fingers is, in principle, not so important. Their main fault was that these people dared to openly go against the royal will, thereby creating a dangerous precedent for future times.

In this case, we are talking specifically about a conflict with the highest state power, since Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich, who ruled at that time, supported the Nikon reform, and rejection of it by part of the population could be regarded as a rebellion and an insult inflicted on him personally. But the Russian rulers never forgave this.

Old Believers today

Concluding the conversation about how Old Believers are baptized and where this movement came from, it would be worth mentioning that today their communities are located in almost all developed countries of Europe, in South and North America, as well as in Australia. It has several organizations in Russia, the largest of which is the Belokrinitsky hierarchy, founded in 1848, whose representative offices are located abroad. In its ranks it unites more than a million parishioners and has its permanent centers in Moscow and the Romanian city of Braila.

The second largest Old Believer organization is considered to be the Old Orthodox Pomeranian Church, which includes about two hundred official communities and a number of unregistered ones. Its central coordinating and advisory body is the Russian Council of the DPTs, located in Moscow since 2002.

U Old Believers-bezpopovtsy The sacrament of Baptism is performed both in natural reservoirs and in the font. If baptism takes place in a font, then the water must be changed after each person being baptized - it is unacceptable to immerse two people being baptized in the same water, since the sins of the person being previously baptized remain in this font. The rites of the sacrament of baptism are strictly observed, however, due to historical circumstances, only those sections of consumer books that were intended for the laity in the absence of a priest are implemented in practical life:

Our Small Potnik, even in a priestless time, was compiled quickly, but not without the Conciliar Reason for the Great Potnik, and only the priestly prayers were shortened, and additional questions were placed in confession. (Answer from the spiritual mentor Fr. spiritual mentor Father Alexander Khrychev about the rite of the Sacrament of Baptism)

Priestlessism has never rejected any church sacrament or ritual as an idea, nor has it questioned the status of the priesthood as the bearer of God's grace. Due to the fact that, according to the teachings of the priestless Old Believers, after the schism of the 17th century, the apostolic succession of the Orthodox clergy was interrupted, the grace of the priesthood was interrupted, and the church hierarchy ceased, problem reception converts turned out to be one of the most important and very difficult. Old Believer non-priest thinkers in the 18th century explained in their writings that in the current historical situation it is impossible, due to the absence of the Old Orthodox church hierarchy, to preserve “the unchanging completeness of all external forms of the Church’s existence,” and therefore partial retreats are inevitable, as evidenced by examples from the Old and New Testament, from the writings of the Holy Fathers and the history of the Church:

BThose who unnecessarily dare to do wrong, as if they were criminals of the law, are condemned. Out of necessity, the one who dares is not exactly condemned, but is also worthy of praise and honor and is justified by all teachers. Otherwise, there is flight and reasoning in this, as in such there is a similarity to daring, in which the most extreme need commands, but not when this is adjacent to the need offering, and not necessary times, and to the need that is not subject to mystery, the need for action, we begin to produce.

Orthodox canons allow a layman to baptize and rebaptize, that is, to accept “ from coming heresies"First rank. Among the Old Believers-bezpopovtsy (except for) it is customary to perform crossing it is necessary for everyone who wants to move from official Orthodoxy to the Old Believers. There is also a practice of re-baptism when moving into the community of Old Believers from other interpretations and agreements. , justifying the rebaptism, they wrote that in general every heretic is subject to re-baptism, and if the church has not previously rebaptized some heretics, then this should be understood not as a law, but as “ condescension" in the hope of their speedy appeal. Reception according to the second and third orders, in the absence of the priesthood, is impossible.

Regarding the reception of priests who received “Nikonian” baptism, the non-priest ideologists initially did not have a common opinion. It is known that the dispute about the rebaptism of priests in the 1710s took place among Starodub Pomeranians. When immigrants from Starodubye arrived in Kerzhensky forests began to rebaptize the priests, a local raised objections Pomeranian mentor Spiridon Ivanov. His message to Kerzhenets has been preserved, justifying the inadmissibility of rebaptizing the priests. However, soon all the non-priests (again, except for the Spasovites) made it a rule to rebaptize the priests who came over to them.

In the first half of the 18th century, the principles of the reception of rites, based on Orthodox rules, relating not to heretics, but to sinners, were approved. The reception of Fedoseevites by Pomeranians and vice versa was carried out through a special prayer rule - the repentant began. Polish Fedoseevsky Cathedral in 1751, he somewhat tightened the requirements for the Pomeranians moving into the Fedoseyev consent, establishing that, in addition to the beginning, they must put 300 bows to the ground.

The first mentors received neophytes coming from the Pomeranian and Fedoseevsky concords in different ways. Myself monk Philip and his student monk Matthew continued to use the principle of repentance to receive converts. Philip's student monk Terenty, spoke in favor of applying a more stringent rule, establishing that those who apply without priests must undergo a six-week fast.

Baptism in the Old Orthodox Pomeranian Church

Before a person accepts Holy Baptism and becomes a true Christian, he becomes a “catechumen”, not yet baptized, but already instructed in the fundamentals of the faith. The need for disclosure is indicated in 46 rule Laodicean And 78 rule Sixth Ecumenical Council. The catechumen originated in the early days of the Church. So, after the apostle's sermon Petra In Jerusalem, about three thousand people converted to Christianity on the holiday (Acts 2:14-41). Later he instructed a Roman centurion in the faith Cornilia with his relatives, and then allowed them to be baptized (Acts 10: 24-48). The apostles did the same Paul(Acts 16, 13-15), Philip(Acts 8:35-38) and others.

The firmness of the decision to accept the new faith was tested. During the persecution of Christians, there were cases of their falling away from the Church, therefore, during the period of training, the Church necessarily monitored the catechumens to see if there were any traitors to Christianity among them or those who falsely received Holy Baptism. If such were discovered, they were immediately expelled from the meeting of the catechumens. The period of catechumen was long - from three months to three years, and this time was divided into several stages, and the catechumens were divided into various classes. The catechetical conversations of the saints, Cyril of Jerusalem, Gregory of Nyssa, Ambrose of Milan, Theodore of Mopsuestia, and Augustine the Blessed, have reached us.

The catechumens had to learn prayer outside the walls of the Temple, as he writes about Kiril of Jerusalem: « Pray often that God will honor you with the heavenly and immortal Mysteries" In addition, the catechumens had to lead a Christian life: fast, keep the Commandments, fight sin, repent of sins before God and people, and correct their spiritual vices.

Those who are going to be baptized need to prepare for this with frequent prayers, fasting, kneeling, vigil and confession of all their past sins..., - writes to the catechumens Tertullian.

Jesus Christ demanded that those who undertake to baptize someone must teach him(Matthew 28:19), and the Pomeranian Church takes a responsible approach to accepting new members into its fold and reverently treats the Sacrament of Baptism itself. Those who come to the Pomeranian Church for the first time and wish to be baptized undergo an interview with a spiritual mentor, talk about themselves and the reasons for their intention. The mentor gives them a sermon about the Christian faith, what Christian life is, how Christianity differs from other religions, and how a Christian should live.

After this, initiation into the catechumens takes place, when the catechumen makes a conciliatory beginning. The moment of announcement in the Pomeranian Church is considered to be the position of the parish leader in the mentor’s cell at the church. The mentor explains and shows how to correctly make the sign of the cross and bow. An approximate date for baptism is assigned, a commandment is given, future recipients are determined, and a baptismal reminder is given. The requirements for recipients are higher than for baptized adults. Recipients must belong to the Church not only formally (that is, be baptized), but also in fact (regularly confess, attend cathedral services), and be able to teach their godchildren the Christian life not only by word, but also by personal example.

Somewhat later, a confessional conversation takes place; before baptism, the catechumen must remember all his grave sins. It turns out whether there are any obstacles, the main of which are drunkenness, smoking, drug addiction and many others.

In 2008, the congress of spiritual mentors of the Ancient Orthodox Pomeranian Church, having considered the canonical foundations and practical order of performing sacraments, services and corrections in the communities of the DOC, established the time of preparation for Holy Baptism (announcement) according to Christian custom - 40 days. In this case, the specific period can be reduced or increased and is chosen by the spiritual mentor depending on the readiness of the person being baptized and other circumstances. The order of preparation for baptism (fasting, prayer, fulfilling the commandments) is determined by the spiritual mentor.

Baptism in the Old Orthodox Pomeranian Church can be accepted regardless of age, gender, nationality, state of health (except for loss of reason, consciousness), and previous religion. Children under 12 years of age are usually baptized if one of the parents belongs to the Old Belief. Baptism of adults occurs only after a preliminary conversation with a spiritual mentor (announcement) and a preparatory period of varying duration. The mentor must necessarily teach the person wishing to be baptized the Old Orthodox faith, explain the meaning of the sacraments and their necessity for the salvation of the soul.

With the Sacrament of Baptism, a person’s new life begins, which is dedicated to serving God and others, life according to the laws of Christ. Baptism is the spiritual birth of a new person, which occurs through the faith of the baptized. Anyone who receives baptism without faith is condemned by the Lord. The Lord God Himself said:

Whoever has faith and is baptized will be saved, and whoever does not have faith will be condemned (Gospel of Mark, chapter 16).

To firm believers the Holy Spirit is given immediately upon Baptism, but to the unfaithful and evil-believing it is not given even after Baptism. (Venerable Mark the Ascetic)

A person who receives baptism only formally or to acquire some benefits comes to this sacrament in vain. He is washed only externally, that is, the body was immersed in water and came out of the water, but the soul was not buried with Christ and was not resurrected with Him, and water for such remains water.

A person baptizes him, but the Holy Spirit will not baptize him, writes St. Kiril of Jerusalem.

The newly baptized person, who accepted the holy faith of his own free will and decided to be reborn spiritually and no longer sin, must actually fulfill his promises to the Lord God. Otherwise, these words-promises will not only not contribute to salvation, but will also lead to condemnation:

It is better for you not to promise, than to promise and not fulfill (Ecc. 5:4).

Infants are baptized according to the faith of their parents. At the baptism of an infant, the recipients promise God that their godson will live a Christian life and become a true warrior of Christ.

About the rite of baptism in the Pomeranian Church

In addition to the person being baptized and the mentor, two godparents (one is possible according to need) - male and female from among the Old Believers over 12 years of age - participate in the baptismal rite. Spouses or the bride and groom cannot be godparents at the same time. If you have any health problems, you should notify your spiritual director in advance. Participants in baptism must be dressed in a Christian way - with covered arms and legs, with a cross and a belt, women - in scarves and dresses (skirts), without makeup, not in a state of menstruation. On the day of baptism, food is not eaten in the morning (except for small children). Godparents and the person being baptized (adult) must know the Creed.

For baptism you need:

Infants: a pectoral cross on a gaitan, a belt, a baptismal set of clothes in white (light) color, a diaper, a vest, a cap, a small towel.

For adults: a pectoral cross on a gaitan, a belt, a sheet or a large towel, a white baptismal shirt with sleeves and without images, of sufficient length; a small towel, for women a light scarf. The white color of the clothes in which those who are baptized signify future mental and physical purity, which they promise to maintain from that moment on.

You should also purchase candles that will stand in front of the faces of the holy icons, and 4 candles that are attached to the font. Burning candles are a symbol of the soul of the baptized, enlightened by grace. There is no fee for baptism:

Tuna eat, give tuna (Gospel of Matthew, part 34)

The rite of baptism is common to all those who come for baptism, but baptism itself is performed separately in different fonts, in complete exposure, by three times complete immersion in water. Only participants in the baptism are allowed into the baptismal room. When small children are baptized, relatives may be present. Photo and video filming during the rite of baptism prohibited. Those who have been baptized before the 8th day are not completely allowed to wash their bodies and change their baptismal robe, and those who are married must remain abstinent. All special cases of baptism (outside the church, at other times, etc.) are performed by agreement with the spiritual mentor.

Your Eminence Metropolitan, holy bishops, honorable fathers and brothers!

The program of the current Consecrated Council, which was discussed at meetings of the Metropolitan Council in October of this year, included the issue of receiving rites for those coming to the Old Believer Church from the New Believers. As far as I know, some of our clergy were prompted to reconsider this issue (the reflection) that all those coming from the New Believers should be re-baptized in connection with the long-standing and very widespread use of pouring baptism among them. They assure that even those of their priests who immerse in baptism are themselves, in the majority, baptized by pouring. On this basis, the holy order of such priests is denied, and all the sacraments they perform are not considered valid.

It seems strange to discuss such an important issue that requires deep research in the conditions of Belaya Krinitsa, where it is difficult to find the necessary sacred theological and church historical books. I dare to offer your love for God some patristic and historical evidence, which I ask you to take into account when developing a council resolution on this subject. They were collected by me over many years of work in Moscow book depositories.

None of us, Old Orthodox Christians, has any doubt that the image of saving baptism bequeathed by the Lord Jesus Christ through St. apostles, is expressed in three times immersion in water with the invocation of the persons of the Holy and Consubstantial Trinity - the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit (Matt. 28.19-20). In order to protect this sacred tradition, the Church, even in ancient times, set forth the 50th Apostolic Canon against those who would have decided to distort the image of the celebration of the sacrament through some heretical wisdom or through ignorance and negligence. “If a bishop or presbyter does not baptize in three immersions with one word, but is given one immersion into the death of the Lord, let him be cast out. For the Lord did not say, baptize into my death: but as you go, teach all languages, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit.” In Joseph's Helmsman, in the margin against this rule there is a note: “In holy baptism, those being baptized should be immersed, not doused.” These words are not part of the text of the rule itself, but were added by the publishers. Usually we, Old Believers, understand this rule in such a way that it completely prohibits pouring baptism and even punishes it with defrocking. But in its true meaning, as well as in the interpretations of St. fathers, it is not directed against dousing, but against single immersion. The Greek word "vaptisma", translated into our language both as "baptism" and as "immersion", in many cases means washing in general, in any way, for example, this is the word used in the 7th chapter. The Gospel of Mark, which talks about washing hands, dishes, tables, etc. It is clear that tables are not washed by immersion, so in the 50th rule of St. The apostle there is no clear and unambiguous prohibition to baptize through pouring water three times on the person being baptized with the invocation of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, or through incomplete immersion in water. There is no such prohibition in the rules of the 7 ecumenical and 9 local councils. It remains to turn to tradition and the living history of the Church in order to understand how ancient Christians treated pouring baptism; if the text of the rules does not give us a direct answer to this, let me give some examples.

I. In a 14th-century manuscript found in Constantinople, an ancient Christian scripture called “The Teaching of the 12 Apostles” was preserved. Historians attribute its recording to the end of the 1st or beginning of the 2nd century AD, i.e., to the time when St. was still alive. ap. John the Theologian and some other “witnesses of the Word and servants.” It literally says the following: “Baptize in living water in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. If there is no living water, baptize in other water; If you can’t do it cold, then warm it. And if there is neither one nor the other, pour water on your head three times.” This clause - in case of water shortage - could be decisive in many Christian communities of Mesopotamia, Parthia, Persia, Arabia and other desert countries, where water is not everywhere and is not always available in abundance.

II. In the 1930s not far from the river Euphrates, on the territory of present-day Iraq, archaeological excavations were carried out on an ancient city, the name of which is not entirely euphonious in Russian, but I can clarify it later for those interested. The results of excavations with photographs were published in the USA and other countries and are now well known. A secret ancient Christian church was also found, built in a private house in the middle of the 3rd century after the Birth of Christ, during the period of persecution of Christians. The church had a font 65 cm high. Considering that in those days most often adults were baptized, we have to admit that they were partially immersed, but not completely.

III. In the books of scientists who studied the Christian temples of Syria in the 4th-5th centuries, i.e. those times when the venerables labored there. Ephraim the Syrian, Simeon the Stylite and other holy men, based on archaeological finds, it is shown that baptismal places in this country, as a rule, had small fonts where it was impossible to completely immerse.

IV. According to the testimony of many St. Fathers and church historians in the ancient Church there were many people who postponed baptism until some serious illness, until extreme old age, and even death. These had to be baptized on the bed, naturally, by pouring. They were called "clinics" from the Greek. the words “klini”, i.e. bed. In the 3rd century A.D. one of the clerics of the Carthaginian church, named Magnus, turned to Saint Cyprian of Carthage, asking whether the baptism of such persons was complete and grace-filled. St. Cyprian replied that no one should be embarrassed that the sick receive Divine grace through sprinkling or pouring, for Scripture itself, through Ezekiel the prophet, says: “I will sprinkle clean water on you, and be cleansed from all your uncleanness.” Thus, St. Cyprian completely equated immersion, dousing, and even sprinkling. Although no one more confidently defends dousing than St. Fathers did not speak out, but neither church councils nor individual authorities refuted these statements of the Hieromartyr Cyprian.

V. The 12th rule of the Neocaesarea Local Council is known, which recognizes as undesirable the ordination to the priesthood of a person who has been baptized on his sick bed. But this rule is stipulated right away: he can be appointed if, after baptism, he shows exemplary zeal in the faith, the ability to teach in the church, or if there is no other worthy candidate. Interpretations of this rule clearly say that the obstacle to ordination in this case is not the pouring form of baptism, but the fact that it was accepted not out of good will, but as if under the compulsion of illness and fear of death.

VI. In the same Carthage church during the time of St. Cyprian was caused by a schism by a certain priest, who at one time was baptized in illness through dousing, but then achieved rank, and after separation from the Church he was elected bishop among his adherents. Called by the name of their leader Novatians or Kafars (i.e. “pure” "). These dissenters had their own churches, their own bishops and clergy throughout the Roman Empire. And the baptism of these Kafars was accepted by the Holy Church, as we see from the First Rule of St. Basil the Great, despite the fact that their hierarchy originates from a bishop who was baptized.

VII. About the same “clinics”, i.e. those receiving pouring baptism on their deathbed, St. John Chrysostom in his first catechumen speech says that they accept “equal gifts of grace with others,” although the disposition of the will and preparation for the task are not equal (Creations, vol. 2, part 1, pp. 252-253).

VIII. Many examples of pouring and sprinkling baptism are contained in the lives of Sts. martyrs. Through the sprinkling of rain from heaven, which came down through the prayer of the saints, they were baptized: St. mchch. Hypatius and Theodulus (June 18), fellow sufferers of St. martyr Akindina (November 2), martyr. Philemon (December 14) and torment. Gavedday, whose relics are said to be located here in the Belokrinitsky Monastery (September 29). Holy Hieromartyr Blasius (February 11) baptized the believing people, sprinkling water from the cauldron in which he was planted to be boiled alive. These are all, of course, special cases, but in the life of Sts. mchch. Mina, Evgraf and Hermogenes (December 10) talks about how St. not in prison, not in the hour of death, but in freedom. Hermogenes was baptized by Egyptian bishops by pouring water on his head. Soon St. Hermogenes was installed as Bishop of Alexandria. It is clear that St. The Church has always recognized the baptism of these saints. martyrs valid and blessed.

IX. One of the first baptisms on Russian soil, according to the Lives of the Saints, was performed by St. much Basil, Bishop of Chersonesos (March 7). At the beginning of the 3rd century A.D. the body of the deceased boy was poured with water from a vessel three times with the words of the baptismal prayer. The deceased came to life and became the first Christian of the city of Chersonesos. (It is also called Kherson and Korsun). In this city received St. baptism and enlightener of Rus' - St. Equal to the Apostles Prince Vladimir.

All these testimonies about the martyrs are found not only in the printed editions of the Menaion of Dmitry of Rostov, but also in ancient Greek and Russian manuscripts, many of which I saw with my own eyes.

X. Baptism of the Kievites in the Pochayna River by Prince Vladimir, according to the ancient Russian chronicle of St. Nestor, it happened like this: “I climbed into the water and stood up to the neck, and the friends up to the Persians, the young ones along the Persians from the shore, the friends holding the babies, and the completion of the tramp; the priest: I create a prayer that is worthwhile.”

XI. Cases of pouring baptism were not uncommon in Rus'. In 1274, a council of bishops of the Russian Church, headed by Metropolitan Kirill, held in Vladimir stated: “Let no one be doused any more, but let them be immersed.” 100 years later, Metropolitan Cyprian again insisted on “not dousing with water, as the Latins do, but immersing.” In the next 15th century, Metropolitan Photius had to write the same thing to Pskov. For centuries, our saints could not ensure that priests everywhere baptized by immersion. In the middle of the 16th century, the Stoglavy Cathedral already reminded of this (chapter 17). And even the reform council of 1666-67. was forced to repeat the prohibition to baptize by pouring. If pouring had been abolished in the Russian Church, there would not have been a need to remind people about it so often. It is noteworthy that in all these cathedral decrees and epistles, nowhere is it prescribed to baptize a second time those who have been baptized by pouring.

XII. In 1276 in Constantinople, a council of bishops answered questions from Bishop Theognost of Sarai, who had his capital in the city of Sarai, the capital of the Tatar Golden Horde. This cathedral allowed, in case of a lack of water in the steppe conditions, baptism through dousing, which was even recorded in some of the ancient written Helmsmen that have survived to this day.

XIII. As for the word “immersion” itself, this did not always mean complete immersion with one’s head.

In Russian handwritten service books of the 16th century, there is an instruction to immerse a weak baby up to the neck, and pour warm water on top of the head with your hand. This instruction was repeated at the beginning of the 17th century in the printed Consumer Guide, published with the blessing of Gideon, Bishop of Lvov (1606); in the Requirements, published in Moscow with the blessing of Patriarch Job (1602), as well as between the patriarchates of Hermogenes and Philaret (1616). A strict indication of the need to immerse any baby, even a weak one, first appears only in the Great Requirement Book of Patriarch Filaret (1626). But no one made any instructions about the rebaptism of those who were baptized according to the previously published Requirements through incomplete immersion.

XIV. As for the rites of acceptance of the Roman Catholics-Oblivans into the Eastern Church, it was carried out in different ways. It is known that among the Latins, by the time of the division of the Eastern and Western Churches, baptism in most countries was no longer performed in three immersions. The Roman popes, starting with Stephen II (8th century), allowed dousing without any special circumstances, and in Spain and in some other countries, a single immersion was established since the 7th century. Despite this, the Eastern Church did not rebaptize the Latins. Patr. Theodore Balsamon of Antioch (12th century), one of the famous interpreters of church rules, for example, believed that in order for the Latins to join Orthodoxy, it was enough only to renounce newly invented dogmas. The blessed one had the same views. Theophylact of Bulgaria (11th century), compiler of brief interpretations of the Gospel included in the book “The Good News”, bishop. John of Kitrozh (also a famous Greek canonist, whose rules were included in the Nomocanon) and some others. However, due to the deepening contradictions between East and West, Rome’s irreconcilable hostility to Orthodoxy, acceptance from the Latins through confirmation became a more generally accepted procedure in the East. Holy men testify to this: St. Niphon, Bishop. Novgorod (in answers to Kirik) (II century), St. Savva, Archbishop Serbian (XIII century - see in his Life), St. Mark of Ephesus (XV century - in his polemical writings against the Latins). The anointing of those coming from the Latins was confirmed at the Council of Constantinople in 1484 under Patr. Simeone. They were received in this manner in the 16th and 17th centuries in all the Greek-Eastern Churches, in Ukraine and Belarus. Only in Moscow Rus' was it customary at this time to accept them through full baptism, but this was done according to custom, and not according to the approved law, and probably not by everyone. An ardent supporter of Latin baptism was St. Patr. Ermogenes. Metropolitan Jonah of Sarsk and Podonsk ordered the Moscow priests to receive two Poles through confirmation based on the instructions of St. Nifont of Novgorod (XI century). This angered the patriarchs. Philaret, who convened a council in the same year against Jonah, where it was strictly decreed that all those coming from the Latins should be fully baptized with a detailed curse of heresies. “Conciliar presentation” of Patr. Philaret and the rite of acceptance “from the Latin heresy” were published in all Moscow large consumer books until the very time of Nikon’s reforms, when in 1657 it was decided that those joining the Roman Church should be anointed without re-baptism.

“Conciliar presentation” of Patr. Philaret formed the basis of the attitude of almost all Old Believers to watering baptism. It is based on this document that our Church, continuing the tradition of the first Moscow patriarchs, subjects to full baptism all who were baptized by pouring or sprinkling (even in the name of the Holy Trinity) in the New Believer, Catholic, Armenian and other churches. Following the tradition of the patriarchs is, of course, commendable, but the question arises: to what extent did our patriarchs themselves follow the universal church tradition in this case? Without a doubt, Patr. Filaret knew that the Jerusalem Patr. Feofan, who erected it on. throne, or patron. Jeremiah of Constantinople, who dedicated the first patriarch in Rus'. Job, they would disagree with his decision. Not a single church outside the Moscow state has ever been guided by its rules.

Even to us Russians, these rules cannot seem completely flawless. For example, Filaret accuses the Latins of heresy of any manifestations of the then Western immorality and lack of spirituality that are not associated with Catholic dogmas, but reflect the oblivion of Christianity in general. Many of the superstitions and outrages that were cursed during the reception from the Latins have long entered Russia, and even some Old Believers are not free from them. But this does not prove that the Old Believers accepted Latin heresies. Further, Filaret has very strange instructions, which we ourselves never follow. For example, those who were baptized by pouring and anointed, he orders to be baptized again, but without confirmation. In Philaret’s rite of infant baptism, it is indicated for each baby to perform the entire rite of prayers and sacred rites separately, i.e. It is not allowed to baptize several babies at once. It was Filaret who first stated in print the impossibility of baptizing several people in one water. Is it possible to say that the Council Exposition of 1620. given for eternity, infallible, unchangeable and has greater authority than the decisions of ancient councils, the teachings of many saints. fathers, and numerous testimonies of Christian antiquity? However, even this does not provide sufficient grounds for the rebaptism of New Believers. If you carefully read the entire “Conciliar Exposition”, it insists on the rebaptism of the Latins and Uniates not specifically for pouring. Everyone knew about pouring baptism among the Latins: both the Greek patriarchs and the Ukrainian zealots of Orthodoxy, who compiled the well-known “Book of Faith” against the Latins. , and Metropolitan Jonah, against whom Philaret opposed, and all of them accepted the baptism of the Latins as valid. To prove the opposite, Pat. Philaret had to give a list of many Latin heresies, which he artificially connects with the teachings of the most serious heretics of antiquity. And since baptism from these The Church did not accept heretics, which means that Latin baptism “is not baptism, but rather desecration.” Moreover, some Roman customs that have existed since ancient times, described by the Latin fathers recognized in Orthodoxy - Cyprian, Augustine, Ambrose of Milan, Jerome, Gregory, are presented as heresies. The Great and others, during whose times no one called these customs heretical, “Jewish” and “damned.” How fair this approach is to Catholics, and even more so to New Believers, is worth seriously considering. Patr. Filaret orders to re-baptize those “Belarusians” who, although they profess the “Greek faith,” are baptized with showering. But those Russian people who in his own patriarchate, in the Moscow state, were not baptized through complete immersion (not because of heresy, but because of illness, neglect or some other reason) - he does not order immersion again. And that such people existed for many centuries has already been thoroughly proven.

To the established opinion among us that the Greek Church commands those who come to it from Latin, like the Oblivians, to be baptized, we need to make a clarification. As has already been said, from the 11th to the 17th centuries, the Latins were accepted by the Greeks through confirmation. Only in 1756 The Council of Constantinople, changing the established order for centuries, declared: “We ... consider contrary to the entire apostolic tradition and as the work of corrupt people, everything that happens among heretics, and that is not done as commanded by the Holy Spirit and the Apostles and as it is happening now in Church of Christ, - by a general decree we reject all heretical baptism, and therefore all heretics... we accept as unsanctified and unbaptized...” (Quoted from the book: Afanasyev N. Entry into the Church. M., 1993, p. 143). The views on heretical baptism expressed by this council contradict the general spirit of church tradition and are close to the teaching of our non-priests. The Filaret Council of 1620 took place shortly after the end of the war with the Poles, in an atmosphere of extreme embitterment of the Russian people against foreigners, and especially Catholic Poles; Likewise, the Council of Constantinople in 1756 was caused by the sharp indignation of the Greeks against the Jesuits, who used their influence at the Turkish court to fight Orthodoxy. The righteous anger that controlled the hearts of the Russians and Greeks in both of these cases was, however, not the best adviser in making canonical decisions. I think that imitating such unrestrained, one-sided, biased decisions means deliberately contributing not to healing, but to deepening the schism, which is completely inconsistent with the spirit of the Holy Gospel.

So, the evidence presented shows that by the general tradition of the Church of Christ throughout its existence, pouring baptism, even performed except in extreme need, was recognized as valid if performed in the name of the Holy Trinity. This conclusion does not tend to introduce pouring baptism into the Old Believers. It is necessary to strictly preserve the strictly canonical and symbolically complete three-immersion form of baptism handed down to us from the apostles, which in the entire ancient Church was undoubtedly the most common and most fully expresses such important dogmas as the Resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ and the redemption of mankind. But how to treat the pouring baptism that has already been performed by someone and for some reason, whether to accept it or not - I ask the Consecrated Council to judge this on the basis of the Holy Scriptures, the tradition of the universal Church and the evidence of church history.