Old Believers and Old Calendarists

[NotChrysostomYet]

Yesterday I read Russia, Ritual, and Reform (one of the few English-language sources on the Old Believers), and I found out that I had been correct about the baptism change timeline: Patriarch Nikon ordered Roman Catholics to be received by chrismation instead of baptism in 1655. The priest I spoke to was mistaken on that point (though I maintain that he is in the right for not condemning ROCOR and the rest of the Russian Church's practice during the Synodal period).

[Barbara]

I haven't caught up on this thread, I am sorry, plan to do so.
But wanted to add a tiny bit of background that it was Patriarch Philaret, the father of Tsar Mikhail Romanov, who was vehemently anti-Catholic and demanded their baptisms upon entry into Orthodoxy. This 1st Patriarch of the Romanov dynasty times leaned strongly toward Protestants. I think it was due to contacts with Lutherans in the Baltic states ?
Patriarch Nikon charted his own course which diverged from the pattern set by Patriarch Philaret in many ways.

That Paul Meyendorff book is not well known but has a lot of fascinating information. For one example, which I was not told anywhere else but this book NCYet mentioned, Patriarch Nikon brought an attractive style of klobouk to Russia, giving Russian monks and nuns a far more dignified appearance forever after. Does he ever get credit ? No. Just like for everything else surrounding his life, a mysterious silence reigns over his vast accomplishments...

At least Paul Meyendorff dug up some of these valuable facts, though as I recall he was not overly enthused about Patriarch Nikon.

[NotChrysostomYet]

I haven't caught up on this thread, I am sorry, plan to do so.
But wanted to add a tiny bit of background that it was Patriarch Philaret, the father of Tsar Mikhail Romanov, who was vehemently anti-Catholic and demanded their baptisms upon entry into Orthodoxy. This 1st Patriarch of the Romanov dynasty times leaned strongly toward Protestants. I think it was due to contacts with Lutherans in the Baltic states ?
Patriarch Nikon charted his own course which diverged from the pattern set by Patriarch Philaret in many ways.

That Paul Meyendorff book is not well known but has a lot of fascinating information. For one example, which I was not told anywhere else but this book NCYet mentioned, Patriarch Nikon brought an attractive style of klobouk to Russia, giving Russian monks and nuns a far more dignified appearance forever after. Does he ever get credit ? No. Just like for everything else surrounding his life, a mysterious silence reigns over his vast accomplishments...

At least Paul Meyendorff dug up some of these valuable facts, though as I recall he was not overly enthused about Patriarch Nikon.

Yes, the Romanov dynasty had a lot of Germanic connections, and unsurprisingly this influenced their (overall) pro-western stance.

Patriarch Nikon does not get a lot of credit for those things because he thought he was restoring ancient traditions when in fact he was doing the opposite. The klobouk he got rid of, for example, had been in use for over a thousand years, and was by far the more ancient practice. (The Coptics still wear a variant of it today, in fact). The klobouk he replaced it with was, in fact, a klobouk that had been modified to look like a Turkish government official's hat. So he doesn't get a lot of credit for these things because he disposed of many ancient traditions due to his foolishness and failure to heed the Patriarchate of Constantinople's advise not to change traditions unnecessarily.

[Maria]

I haven't caught up on this thread, I am sorry, plan to do so.
But wanted to add a tiny bit of background that it was Patriarch Philaret, the father of Tsar Mikhail Romanov, who was vehemently anti-Catholic and demanded their baptisms upon entry into Orthodoxy. This 1st Patriarch of the Romanov dynasty times leaned strongly toward Protestants. I think it was due to contacts with Lutherans in the Baltic states ?
Patriarch Nikon charted his own course which diverged from the pattern set by Patriarch Philaret in many ways.

That Paul Meyendorff book is not well known but has a lot of fascinating information. For one example, which I was not told anywhere else but this book NCYet mentioned, Patriarch Nikon brought an attractive style of klobouk to Russia, giving Russian monks and nuns a far more dignified appearance forever after. Does he ever get credit ? No. Just like for everything else surrounding his life, a mysterious silence reigns over his vast accomplishments...

At least Paul Meyendorff dug up some of these valuable facts, though as I recall he was not overly enthused about Patriarch Nikon.

Yes, the Romanov dynasty had a lot of Germanic connections, and unsurprisingly this influenced their (overall) pro-western stance.

Patriarch Nikon does not get a lot of credit for those things because he thought he was restoring ancient traditions when in fact he was doing the opposite. The klobouk he got rid of, for example, had been in use for over a thousand years, and was by far the more ancient practice. (The Coptics still wear a variant of it today, in fact). The klobouk he replaced it with was, in fact, a klobouk that had been modified to look like a Turkish government official's hat. So he doesn't get a lot of credit for these things because he disposed of many ancient traditions due to his foolishness and failure to heed the Patriarchate of Constantinople's advise not to change traditions unnecessarily.

This all makes sense. I really never liked the klobouk worn by certain Russian hierarchs, hiermonks, and nuns, as it adds to their height and supposed dignity, encouraging not humility but pride.

Here is an example of a very tall klobouk. I am not directly linking it.

http://www.dep.church/images/Bishop-Auxentios.jpg

There is a book written by Abbess Thaisia (1840 - 1915), St. Xenia Skete, 1993, entitled, Letters to a Beginner: On Giving One's Life to God. Abbess Thaisia censures nuns who abandon their cell prayer rule to spend more time making handicrafts so that they can have the extra money needed to purchase a fancy new monastic ryassa or klobouk.

Abbess Thaisia herself wore a very tall klobouk as seen on page 13 of this 1993 printing. However, she seems to censure herself when she writes:

I must admit that in beginning to write to you on this subject, I feel some awkwardness. I am as though ashamed before myself .... I am writing about luxury in clothing, about self-adornment, about superfluity. ... Alas, in present-day monasticism this infirmity has become so great that it would be a sin not to speak a few words about it to warn you. (p. 58)

I prefer the humble Greek monastic klobou as seen in this picture below:

[Justice]

I haven't caught up on this thread, I am sorry, plan to do so.
But wanted to add a tiny bit of background that it was Patriarch Philaret, the father of Tsar Mikhail Romanov, who was vehemently anti-Catholic and demanded their baptisms upon entry into Orthodoxy. This 1st Patriarch of the Romanov dynasty times leaned strongly toward Protestants. I think it was due to contacts with Lutherans in the Baltic states ?
Patriarch Nikon charted his own course which diverged from the pattern set by Patriarch Philaret in many ways.

That Paul Meyendorff book is not well known but has a lot of fascinating information. For one example, which I was not told anywhere else but this book NCYet mentioned, Patriarch Nikon brought an attractive style of klobouk to Russia, giving Russian monks and nuns a far more dignified appearance forever after. Does he ever get credit ? No. Just like for everything else surrounding his life, a mysterious silence reigns over his vast accomplishments...

At least Paul Meyendorff dug up some of these valuable facts, though as I recall he was not overly enthused about Patriarch Nikon.

Yes, the Romanov dynasty had a lot of Germanic connections, and unsurprisingly this influenced their (overall) pro-western stance.

Patriarch Nikon does not get a lot of credit for those things because he thought he was restoring ancient traditions when in fact he was doing the opposite. The klobouk he got rid of, for example, had been in use for over a thousand years, and was by far the more ancient practice. (The Coptics still wear a variant of it today, in fact). The klobouk he replaced it with was, in fact, a klobouk that had been modified to look like a Turkish government official's hat. So he doesn't get a lot of credit for these things because he disposed of many ancient traditions due to his foolishness and failure to heed the Patriarchate of Constantinople's advise not to change traditions unnecessarily.

This all makes sense. I really never liked the klobouk worn by certain Russian hierarchs, hiermonks, and nuns, as it adds to their height and supposed dignity, encouraging not humility but pride.

Here is an example of a very tall klobouk. I am not directly linking it.

http://www.dep.church/images/Bishop-Auxentios.jpg

There is a book written by Abbess Thaisia (1840 - 1915), St. Xenia Skete, 1993, entitled, Letters to a Beginner: On Giving One's Life to God. Abbess Thaisia censures nuns who abandon their cell prayer rule to spend more time making handicrafts so that they can have the extra money needed to purchase a fancy new monastic ryassa or klobouk.

Abbess Thaisia herself wore a very tall klobouk as seen on page 13 of this 1993 printing. However, she seems to censure herself when she writes:

I must admit that in beginning to write to you on this subject, I feel some awkwardness. I am as though ashamed before myself .... I am writing about luxury in clothing, about self-adornment, about superfluity. ... Alas, in present-day monasticism this infirmity has become so great that it would be a sin not to speak a few words about it to warn you. (p. 58)

I prefer the humble Greek monastic klobou as seen in this picture below:

I like both, but I prefer the white klobou worm by Russian metropolitans as I think it really shows high status. Though my thoughts on the Russian klobou just show that we should stick to the Greek klobou with a simple red cross.

[NotChrysostomYet]

I have better pictures with the more standard, lower-ranking gear, but here is a picture of the current Old Believer Metropolitan of Moscow, Metropolitan Cornelius:

The late Old Believer Metropolitan John of Moscow:

Metropolitain Cornelius leading a procession:

Here is Metropolitain Cornelius in his every-day out-and-about outfit (he's the one with the cross on his hat):

Metropolitan Cornelius in vestments:

Here is Bishop Daniel of blessed memory, the ROCOR bishop for the Old Ritualists:

Last but not least, here is a photo of an Old Believer bishop in his festive Great Schema outfit:

You will rarely see them wearing this outfit, though I am under the impression that they will wear this more often when other people aren't around. (Consequently it is harder to find images of monks or bishops wearing this. However, it is definitely still in use in the traditional context, unlike mainstream Russian Orthodoxy today).

Anyway, hope you enjoyed!

[Maria]

...

I prefer the humble Greek monastic klobou as seen in this picture below:

I like both, but I prefer the white klobou worm by Russian metropolitans as I think it really shows high status. Though my thoughts on the Russian klobou just show that we should stick to the Greek klobou with a simple red cross.

The Greek Old Calendar Hierarchs who wear the red cross on their veil, which covers the klobou, have taken the Great Schema.